rmnka447

I play KS this way. The only thing I'd add is that a new suit shows extras as responder can be as low as 10 HCP. 3 of opener's minor also guarantees at least 4+ cards. Normally it's 5+, but could be 4 if opener opened a 4-4-4-1 hand.

Wow! What a hand! I'm not sure I'd do any differently than try and ruff a ♣. But if you don't believe that LHO would underlead the ♣ Q especially with 4 trumps, then you might consider the squeeze. If RHO has the ♣ Q, then the resulting double squeeze would end up being a type R double squeeze. The high card winners are right for the compound squeeze. But the problem is recalling all the conditions necessary and proper order of play as outlined in Love. It also depends on sorting out which suit is being abandoned by RHO. That doesn't seem like it would be so easy to do on a pivotal board in an important competition. The thing that jumped out at me about the OP explanation of the result was the gut feeling he had about a possible singleton ♣. It struck a chord with me. Over the years, I had similar feelings about the way a hand lays, an action to take, or a call to make. Whenever I've ignored them or rationalized a different course of action, the results haven't been pretty. These gut feelings don't come up often, but I've learned to strongly consider them when they occur. As a result, I've gotten much better results. It's made me believe that there's something called "table presence" that operates at some subliminal level. Whatever vibs you pick up as a result of it -- gut feelings -- should be strongly listened to.

Taking a little time to work out the missing honors might help. You're looking ♥ Q and ♣ A. Dummy has ♠ K ♥ K ♦ AJ ♣ Q. If you believe partner has ♥ AJ from the play, that accounts for 24 HCP leaving 16 HCP points remaining. Partner should have something like 4 of these points else responder would probably have bid game directly. The remaining honors are ♠ AQJ ♦ KQ ♣ KJ. If partner has the ♦ K, it will probably come home. Declarer would need to have something like ♣ KJ10xx to pitch enough ♦s from dummy in order to ruff any ♦ losers in dummy. If partner has the ♣ K, partner may have a tough time switching to a ♣ because of the uncertainty of the location of the ♣ A. Partner's lead of a ♣ may give away the contract if Declarer holds it. If partner holds the ♣ K, declarer almost has to have the ♦ K and may be able to set up a pitch or pitches on the ♦ for any ♣ loser. So, leading the ♣ A is one of those clarification plays that helps partner from going wrong. You might even set the contract if declarer has rounded suit doubletons.

I'm not bidding with such poor suit quality despite the shape.

I'm not bidding with such poor suit quality despite the shape.

I'm bidding 1 NT on the West cards. At a minimum, West owes East a raise to 2 NT.

There's no way to know what RHO 4 ♠ is made on. It could be a distributional player or a strong 5 loser hand. Anyhow, the 4 ♠ bid has certainly tossed a monkey wrench into any constructive slam exploration. There's just no way to know exactly where partner's values are either. So here, I'm bidding 5 ♣ --- getting to what should be a good spot versus a potentially perfect/terrible spot of 6 ♣. Bidding slam is putting cards into partner's hand that you can't know are there or not. In a team game, it's the action I'd feel most comfortable defending in the post mortem. Failing to bid slam amid uncertainty is more explainable than bidding a slam that goes down and gives up a vulnerable game swing. At MPs, bidding slam seems like a wild shot at a top. I'd expect most people in the field to settle in game in similar circumstances.

Opener's hand got WORSE when responder made a 2 ♥ 5+ GF bid. Partner's ♥ values are less likely to be of value. So I don't think a 3 ♣ "high reverse" bid is right on the hand. Instead, I think a simple minimum response is right -- 2 ♠ or (if your style permits) 2 NT. Once 3 ♣ is bid, it looks to South like he's got the World's Fair -- double fit with As in the fitting suits and controls in the outside suits. The momentum caused by the 3 ♣ bid makes it difficult for South to stop.

To me, 3 ♠ sets ♠ as trump and suggests that opener probably doesn't want to play below 4 ♠. With RHO opponent bidding ♥, it's not clear much how the ♥ KQJx are worth. You do have a potential ruffing value in ♦. You'd be more excited if the KQJx were in ♣s. At this point, I think 4 ♠ is right.

If you bid anything, I think double would be better than bidding ♥s. It happened to work this time, BUT BEWARE ... having played weak (12-14) NTs over 40+ years, they've been many, many, many times after a 2nd seat overcall of 1 NT that as responder I've held something like Q10xx in the trump suit with 9 or 10 total HCP and lowered the boom with a penalty double. They've resulted in lots of juicy 500 or 800 sets and plenty of decent 200 sets with only the very rare doubled contract making. This may seem counterintuitive, but you need to have better holdings to compete against a weak NT than against a strong NT. The difference is that when the opponents have the balance of the points, they will be distributed more evenly between the two hands than with a strong NT. This usually leads to a better, less strained defense. It also means that there's less likelihood that any cards you need favorably placed in opener's hand will be there than with strong NT hands where opener has the preponderance of the opponent's points.

On the actual auction, South definitely gets the lion's share of the blame IMO. North has essentially shown a 6 ♦- 5 ♠ by his free bid over 2 ♥. Then over the opponent's 4 ♥, North has bid 5 ♣ rather than settle for a simple competitive 4 ♠. By bidding 5 ♣, North has forced the contract to be at least 5 ♠ on the simple raise South has made. So, to my mind, North is showing a 1st round ♣ control and extras. Holding the ♦ A, South can see that North is looking at a ♦ loser. North should have a maximum of 2 rounded suit cards. Based on the bidding, it's highly unlikely North holds ♥ xx ♣ - (void) as that would have the opponents competing to 4 ♥ on only an 8 card fit. So North is highly likely to hold either ♥ - ♣ Ax or ♥ x ♣ A. So South's ♥ A should cover any outside loser in North's hand. The stiff ♦ A should insure no ♦ losers. South also has ♠ Jxxx versus no more than xxx promised by the 3 ♠ raise. These are all undisclosed values that North can't know about or assume in making his/her bids so far. So if it's right for North to force to at least 5 ♠ with the North hand, these undisclosed values make it right to bid slam. I think South has a clear raise to 6 ♠. BTW, I would also bid 4 ♠ instead of 3 ♠ earlier in the auction.

4 ♥ for me, also. You can never know exactly what's right on this hand, so I don't think starting with a cue gains much. The down side to a cue is that it might give the opponents a chance to speak at a lower level, find a fit and compete. Give partner as little as xxx AKxxx xxx Qx and 4 ♥ may make. So there's nothing wrong with making an aggressive game bid with some values here. Tactically, it's not a bad idea to do so occasionally anyhow. I remember a KO quite a few years ago where holding a similar hand game was bid and doubled. It made for a swing. Then on the following hand, the bidding was the same except the 4 ♥ bid was a typical preemptive raise. The opposition, having been burned on the previous hand, was unsure of what was held and didn't find a double. However, a double was needed to salvage a near push as their game made.

I'm a ♥ leader also. Responder must have long diamonds and a distributional hand else an exploration for NT might have occurred. Likewise, possibly with ♦ and a major, a search for a major might have been pursued. Responder ought to able to see that it's likely no more than one trick would be lost. If responder had something like ♠ Kxx ♥ Kxx ♦ KQ109xxx ♣ - , an ace ask doesn't help much, but 6 seems like a pretty good bet. It's not much but all the evidence you have. A trump lead might be attractive if you thought an opener ruff might be necessary to make 6. But with long ♦ in responder's hand, it's more likely opener has a doubleton ♦ rather than a doubleton in a side suit. From your hand, if responder is short in a suit it's more likely to be ♣ than anything else. Like gszes says, partner is likely to have more ♥s and therefore some values in that suit than any other.

A ♠ for me also. Responder has denied a ♠ fit by bidding 3 NT. If they are 4-3-3-3, c'est la vie. One thing's certain, I'm not leading low from 1074.

Double. Same reasoning as in previous thread. The opponents do have the "high ground" holding the ♠ suit. They can win a competitive auction at the same level. However, if they do end up in a ♠ contract, you have a bit of a nasty surprise for them.

After the 2 ♣ rebid by opener, responder 2 level rebids below 2 NT show no more than 8 HCP and basically signoffs unless opener has extras. Responder rebids of 2 NT or higher show approximately 9-12 and are descriptive. After a 2 NT or higher rebid, Opener with a minimum and no great fit usually passes. In a pinch, if your suit is less robust, say something like xx KJ10xx AQxx xx, you can bid 2 NT. 3 ♥ might not play so well with this hand opposite a small doubleton in partner's hand. The hand you pose is exactly the hand for a jump rebid to 3 ♥ after a forcing NT response. Your suit will play well even opposite a stiff in partner's hand. Partner with a doubleton A and extras should have no problem raising to 4 ♥.

Guess I'm just a basher also. I'd bid 6 ♣. Would you expect partner to make any kind of slam try missing all the outside 1st round controls AND the trump Q? No! Yet partner has contracted to play 5 ♣ only knowing that we have support. Partner likely has long ♣s, but even with AKJxxxx partner needs something else to make the 2/1 GF bid. With 4 sure tricks for partner versus the 2 or 3 partner might expect for the 5 ♣ bid, I think it's right to go on.

Double first. As a general rule of bidding, it's usually not good to suppress a major holding. In this example, say your LHO bids 2 ♦ non forcing over your 1 NT response. Partner with 4 ♠ and a minimum certainly isn't likely to bid ♠ -- especially if he/she takes the inference that you didn't negative double to show 4 ♠s. If it is now passed back to you, are you going to bid 2 ♠? No, you're not strong enough. Also, partner might be passing with something like 2=3=3=5 and bidding gets you into big trouble. The problem is that sometimes when you pass, you'll find that partner DID hold 4 ♠s and you're missing a perfectly good ♠ part score. If you double, partner can now bid 2 ♠ over 2 ♦ if he/she has 4 ♠. If partner passes, you don't have to gamble on a 2 ♠ bid because partner is very unlikely to have 4 ♠s. Also, if partner makes a strong bid, you still may be able to show your ♥ stopper later in the auction.

As nekthen points out, many people now play an immediate jump shift as something other than a very strong and forcing hand. Many use it as a preemptive bid. Some might use it as a jump fit bid. But even if you do want to play it as strong, there's another reason not to use it here. It takes up so much bidding space that it gets difficult to identify and sort out game versus slam with a fit in a third suit. So generally you're better off using a strong jump shift for near slam going hands where the potential slam will in opener's suit, responder's suit, or NT. Holding two suits as here, bidding as responder has by reversing as responder gives you more room to figure out where and how high you belong.

In your auction over 4 ♦, West has controls in every suit but ♥s. So the biggest potential problem with slam is the possibility of 2 ♥ losers off the top. Needing to know about a specific control points towards cueing. So a 4 ♠ cue denying a heart control starts the process and highlights the problem for partner. Similarly after: 1 ♦ - 1 ♥ 2 ♣ - 2 ♠ (GF) 2 NT - 4 ♦ ? A 4 ♠ cue now would also points up the ♥ control issue.

Playing strong NTs, I'd open 1 NT with a 5-3-3-2 hand. But with a 5-4 hand, I'm opening 1 ♠ unless the doubletons are very strong and the suits weak (like ♠ Qxxxx ♥ AQ ♦ AQ ♣ Qxxx). Unless you're playing some conventions over the forcing NT, a simple rebid can show as much as 16. So the normal 2 ♣ would be right here.

It was lucky for the ♦ slam to come home. With North showing the rounded suits, South rates to have the ♦ length and the ♦ finesse rates to be off if West doesn't have the ♦ K. How about East bidding NT at some point in the auction? The majority of East's points are in the suits the opponents have bid. East has already denied 4 ♠s (by definition) with the double. East has no ruffing values for a ♦ contract. I think the place to make the NT bid is over the 2 ♣ bid. 3 NT at this point would certainly be to play, but doesn't necessarily show more than an opening bid and stoppers. 4 NT can't be an A ask as East has already denied 4 ♠ and a ♦ fit has not been established. So I would think, it should about what is held an 18-19 count and stoppers.

Partner's argument that you are 6-5 and were giving a choice of contracts is bogus unless you regularly bid 1 NT when holding 4 ♠. Assuming not, then partner has already denied 4 ♠s and the choice between playing in a 9 card fit or 8 card fit is moot. It's almost always right to play in the greater fit. So what can the 3 ♠ bid be? If Partner still wants to believe it shows 6-5, OK, but it must be a slam try. Opposite such a hand, Partner needs to revaluate how their hand fits with it. If you are 6-5, then you must hold 2 minor cards. Partner's hand has both minor As, so Partner knows there are no minor losers at all. Additionally, Partner holds honor third in both your suits which is certainly a very positive holding. So, Partner should cooperate and make a 4 ♣ cue. If Partner decides it must be a cue bid, then Partner should again reevaluate. Even though minimum, Partner still holds the 1st round controls in the outside suits and fitting fragments with honors in your bid suits. Again, that's very positive and Partner should cooperate by cueing 4 ♣.

If partner's weak 2s are "sensible", then partner likely has a ♠ holding headed by the ♠ K/KJ/KJ10 and some outside values. The problem is that you don't know where partner's outside values are. At this level (above 4 ♥), there's no way to identify them. If partner has bid 2 ♠ on something like ♠ KJ10xxx ♥xx ♦ Ax ♣ xxx, a ♠ slam is excellent. But if partner holds something like♠ KJ10xxx ♥Ax ♦ xx ♣ xxx, 4 ♠ may be the last makeable contract. Additionally, partner might have some extra length if the ♠ texture isn't as good -- K109xxxx vs. KJ10xxx. That extra length raises the possibility of a spade ruff if you choose to play in ♦. When the opponents have preempted, the first priority is to land in a "good" spot versus a "perfect" spot. While you wish you could find slam if it's there, the "good" vs. "perfect" spot is 4 ♠.

I'm bidding 2 ♠ which shows a good hand with or without ♥ support. You have only 15 HCP, but have an excellent 7 card ♦ suit. It is a 5 loser hand which is a bit better playing strength than a lot of 16-18 point hands which you would jump rebid in ♦. There's no reason not to let that you have a strong hand.