rmnka447

It should be a penalty double. Partner has shown a strong hand, so there's no need for opener to have a card showing double. If the auction had been, say, 1 D - P - 1H - (2S) - Dbl, the double would have been card showing because partner's 1 H response is ambiguous. It could show anything from a scraggly 4 or 5 to 20. So there's a need to establish that your side has the balance of the points even when pard has the minimum.

3 NT -- Partner has presumably shown opening plus values. Following the old saw -- "If 3 NT is a logical alternative in an auction, it probably should be bid." Can't recall who coined it -- think it was Hamman or Wolff -- but over the years, it has come up time and again. In the vast majority of auctions, it has proved to be very wise advice.

The opponents are more likely to be extremely aggressive in third seat white versus red. 2 ♥ can be bid on almost anything. (In the US, the ACBL has a 5 and 5 criteria -- weak 2s have to promise at least 5 cards in the suit bid and 5 points.) I think 3 ♥ is right -- generally following what Steve Moe suggested. After 3 ♥, I think 3 ♠ by partner is an all purpose sign off bid that partner can make with any bad hand. You can then bid 3 NT which should make as long as nobody else holds 5+ ♦s. After a 3 NT call over 3 ♥, I'm really torn between bidding 4 NT inviting 6, or just bidding 6. I'd probably go with just inviting with 4 NT because of potential transport problems to partner's hand. After 4 ♥ over 3 ♥, I'd bid 5 ♦.

East certainly doesn't have enough to intervene directly over the preempt. West knows that at most South has only 1 ♠. As such, South has to have a monster to make any move over 3 ♠. So South is still capable of having a lot more than was actually held. Double in the pass out seat would be takeout. Bidding 4 ♦ on a 6 card broken suit with red pockets is a complete shot in the dark. You might make 130, but you'll also frequently pickup -200, -500, or -800. The only sane course is for West to pass and let North/South struggle.

Given my druthers, I'd always open 1 ♠ with 5-5 in the blacks. Unfortunately, one of my regular partners insists that we open 1 ♣ with these hands. It is a source of confusion in many competitive auctions. The opponents are likely to more intervene more over 1 ♣ and it can get very murky as to whether opener has 4 or 5 ♠s.

5 ♥ looking only at the responding hand. It has 3 sure cover cards plus possibilities in 2 suits for a 4th cover card with a successful finesse. I expect partner to make a very solid preempt in 2nd seat unfavorable. Pard ought to have an 8 trick hand and will often have one with 9. However, if your style is to always aggressively preempt, you have to pass and accept missing a slam as the price you occasionally pay for doing so.

Pass. I'd really like to bid. But there's a pretty big chance that if we win the contract, it will have to be played entirely out of the strong hand. Defending against ♥s might not be a picnic either. It seems like opener must have a very distributional hand to make a game try without a really big hand which would negate some of the high cards in this hand. And, of course, this hand looks pretty ripe for an endplay. If opener's psyching a game try, it's working against me this time. That would make it more likely that there are honors adversely placed in responder's hand.

Pass, no matter what. If partner goes for a ton in 3 NT, then next time partner might not be bid 3 NT with a similar hand. But there might be some method to partner's madness. Give partner ♠ A ♥ Kx ♦ Jxx ♣ AKQJxxx and 3 NT may be a maker with an expected ♥ lead. Anything you do other than pass is likely to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

You made a free bid of 1 ♠ on your first opportunity to respond after the double. So you've certainly bid the value of your hand already. If partner has a hand that makes game opposite a doubleton heart and the ♠ A in my hand, then partner has underbid. In a pinch, partner could cue 2 ♣ -- then bid ♥s or raise ♠s. The other possibility is a jump to 3 ♥ which sort of says -- if you have any good excuse to bid 4, do so. So while 2 ♥ shows a good hand, I'll pass.

I'd bid 3 ♥ even though I don't like the distribution. Even if you go for a number occasionally, it puts pressure on the opponents. It may not tell on this hand, but later in the match it may have an effect. The trick is to pick your spots and not just intervene indiscriminately. 2 ♥ does nothing -- if opener has a distributional hand, the main suit is ♠s or a minor. Opener can still make the same bid as if you had passed. So their auction will go on essentially unimpeded. About all you've done is tip off the opponents about the heart situation. If you bid 2 ♥ and partner has a fit, will partner ever be able to picture that you hold 7 with 2 of the top 3 honors? OTOH if opener has 2 suits, 3 ♥ might just be high enough to interfere with them finding the right strain or best strain. On a good day, pard may be able to raise and make them guess what to do at the 5 level.

Add another plus 1 for mikeh's post. Sometimes it pays to take a little time and work out what honors are missing. From what you hold in your two hands, the missing honors are ♠ Q ♥ K ♦ KQJ ♣ J. It looks like East definitely has to have the ♥ K to be anywhere near an opening bid. So you know, there's no hope for a ♥ finesse. West might have a stray J, but it looks like everything else has to be in East's hand. Proceed as mikeh outlines.

Sorry, missed that in the subsequent discussion the first time through. I would bid 3 ♣ then and hope pard with a good opener could take further action. Responder's hand has 11 HCP and 2 QTs, but 7 1/2 losers (2 losers each in the majors, 1 in ♦, 2 1/2 losers in ♣ [Qxx has an extra 1/2 loser vs. QJx/Q10x which would be 2 losers]). Even then, it's hard to value the Js at full value because their doubletons. So IMHO, it's pretty aggressive to consider the responding hand as a game forcing hand. That's OK if you can provide some mechanism to warn partner that is the case. That was my whole point in identifying a 3 ♦ rebid for each player as a bid that identifies a hand that they are pushing on. It's just good bidding practice at some point in the auction to limit your hand if you are bidding on dead minimum values or less. It's even OK to not provide such a mechanism, but just be prepared to accept the results on hand's like this as part of the price to be paid occasionally for being aggressive.

3 NT also. If they both have full value for their bids, you're probably going down. But if not, pard just might have a card useful for making 9 tricks. It's well worth the gamble.

South doesn't really have a GFing hand. If 2 ♣ would also be a game force, then South has a real problem with what to bid. South's choices are a NT bid (1 NT, 2 NT) or a GF bid with no inbetween. Of those, I think 2 ♦ is the least offensive. In any case, North should have the option of bidding 3 ♦ to show a terrible 1 ♦ opener with ♦. That's what I'd do. If South can still find a 3 NT bid then it's probably right. With the actual auction, after North's 2 ♥ bid, South now has 3 ♦ as a possible rebid and I think that's what should have been bid. Same general message as opener's 3 ♦ rebid -- I have a minimum/bad hand for the GF bid. If opener finds a 3 ♠ rebid after South's 3 ♦ rebid, then South can bid 3 NT and it will probably be right. If 2 ♣ just shows ♣s and forces for 1 round, then South can try 2 ♣ and raise ♦ over opener's rebid.

3 ♣ seems obvious. Any other action including Double or Pass bars partner for the rest of the auction. OTOH, you want to encourage LHO to bid so you can get to Double the second time around. If pard has enough for game and we end up in 3 ♣s, that's just the breaks.

I'm bidding 2 ♣ followed by 3 ♣ and if need be 4 ♣. Pard will eventually get the picture.

The 4 ♠ bid tells me there's plenty of distribution in this hand. I can't see RHO chiming in at 4 ♠ with less than 4 of them. If the 2 ♠ bid was a DONT 2 ♠ bid, it's just possible that ♠ AQ might be worth 2 tricks. But otherwise, I'd think LHO ♠holding has something like ♠ KJ or ♠ K10 heading it up. Partner will often have no more than 1 ♠. I wouldn't be surprised if partner's hand had a 5 or 6 card minor suit in it. The problem is I don't know which it is. So, I like the forcing pass that Codo suggests, also. BTW, almost all the Lebensohl players I know play fast denies a stopper. That would be more in context with the actual auction.

I voted to open 1 ♣ in both instances. But the more I look at the hand, the more I can see 1 NT as a very reasonable alternative. When you open 1 ♣ and plan to rebid 3 ♣, you imply a pretty good ♣ suit -- certainly something that can stand playing 3 ♣ if pard has a nondescript singleton. But here the ♣ spots aren't very good. You're pretty sure to lose at least 2 tricks and maybe 3 whenever ♣s break 4-2. So a ♣ partial may not be all that attractive vs 1 NT.

Lots of charges to hand out on this one for egregious bids or plays. South gets one for opening 1 ♠ with this hand. Yep, it has 2 QTs, but only has 10 HCP. There is a continuum for hands that runs between a 1 bid and a weak 2. Even with the 2 quicks this one looks to me to be on the weak 2 side of the boundary between them. North gets a charge for the double of 3 ♥. If you are in a 2/1 game force situation, you side either bids game or RARELY can stop in 3 of a major or 4 of a minor. 3 ♠ is obviously a no go. So North needs to bid a minor. South gets a charge for the lead of a trump. The opponents have not shown any indication that the hand involves a cross ruff. They have shown at least 8 trump between them. Partner therefore looks to have 4 trump at most. A trump lead may help declarer pick up all partner's trumps something that he/she couldn't do by himself/herself. Codo suggests a ♠ lead. That's what the auction suggests. South has freely bid 2 ♠ over 2 ♥ which shows 6+ ♠s, yet North didn't support ♠ with game going values. It strongly implies that North doesn't have 2 or more ♠s. ♠ A, ♠ Q/ruff, low ♦/♦ K, ♠/ruff, ♦ A, ♣ A will yield +300. The alternative lead of the ♦ K will still beat 3 ♥ one. ♦ K/♦ Q, ♠ A, ♠/ruff, ♦ A, ♣ A for +100. Since North is marked with ♦, the ♦ Q was a suit preference signal for ♠s.

I'm right there with the general consensus - Pass on the 1st hand, 3 ♥ on the 2nd, and Double on the last two.

I'd probably bid 2 NT with the hand. Although I can see why double is made by some folks. After 2 NT showing 15-17/18 and a ♠ stopper, West should have no problem getting to slam. After checking on As at some point in the auction,6 NT should be pretty easy to bid. What your next bid is after 2 NT pretty much depends on what methods you employ over pard's 2 NT But even after a double, slam should be reached. The right start should be 3 ♠. You have 18 HCP opposite at least an opening bid, so have to be looking at least 30+ points between the two hands. Game is assured and slam is possible if there are the right cards in doubler's hand.

Double as a 1 suiter seems to be in line with playing DONT. The opponent's waited to find out what suit the intervening side had and then competed. They found a good fit in a partial. So give them some credit. Opponents are allowed to do something right, too. Advancer has enough points so that the opponents are unlikely to try for game. So, in all likelihood, the opponents will either play in NT or possibly in ♥s if responder has 5+ ♥s. Once West competes and shows a 1 suited ♣ hand, I don't see any way that East can compete to 2 ♠. Yeah, it works this time, but they'll be plenty of other times that stepping in to an auction with a known misfit costs you -200 or -500. It's just not a good bet to do so. I think the problem is competing in the first place with what is likely a running suit against NT. If the opponents end up in NT, you're likely to get a good result. I'll bet that is exactly what happened here. They'll make 1 NT for +90, but since they also make 2 or 3 in a ♥ partial for +110 or +140 leaving them in 1 NT gets you a good result.

On the first hand, I also like two4's 3 ♠ call denying a ♥ control. In this auction, you are already in the slam exploration zone with one hand showing a game forcing raise and the other showing a second suit with extras. So any further new suit bids by responder ought to show controls. 3 ♥ as suit bid really doesn't do much good as there's virtually no room to bid out your hand pattern. So you're better off using other suit bids to show controls. As an adjunct to showing controls, available trump suit and NT bids can be used as waitng bids to allow more efficient use of the available control bidding space. This is especially important when using the more in vogue fashion of bidding any control (1st or 2nd round) control. The important thing is to have some understanding of what controls are implied or denied by making the waiting bid. That's a matter for partnership understanding as it can be handled several ways. Here, two4 says 3 ♠ shows slam interest and denies a ♥ control. That's fine. It does have one advantage in that it lets opener cheaply show or deny another control. Consider if opener had held ♣ xx, he might bid 3 NT to deny a ♣ control. That still allows responder room to bid 4 ♣ to show one below game. If 3 ♠ denies a ♥ control, then 4 ♣ should show both a ♣ control and a ♥ control. Without a ♥ control, opener knows there must be at least 2 losers and signs off in game. After 4 ♣ by opener, I'd be more inclined to simply show the ♦ control by bidding 4 ♦. (If responder really had ♦s, he could have immediately bid 4 ♦ over 3 ♦ to reveal the double fit.) This greatly simplifies matters for opener. After 4 NT reveals all keycards are held, opener now has enough information to ask about the ♣ K with 5 NT.

If partner is not insane, partner must have a 12 card ♠ suit headed by the AQ and another card. Otherwise, he can't really know if slam can make be very sure slam will make. I'm bidding 7 NT to get to the safest slam. So long as we can run ♠s, 13 tricks are there. 7 NT removes the only possibility of defeating the grand -- a ruff on the opening lead.

Sure, because my partner would take time to think about why I bid 6 missing both queens from suits I'm known to have. The initial 4 ♠ response promises absolutely nothing. Since my partner would know I'm not a player who wildly bids slams, my partner would conclude that I hold ♠ AKxxx or ♠ AKxxxx, no losers in the outside suits, and something like ♥ AKJxx. My partner would after some thought gently place the 7 ♠ bid on the table.