SteveMoe

Absent agreements, even awful is too kind. Too much defense. Too wide ranging. Too undisciplined. However, playing Reverse Namyats this is a max for 4♥ - 4 losers and solid suit. Partner should count 12 tricks so slam will not be missed. The problem with 4♥ on this hand? This bid is now too wide ranging. How can partner double 4♠ with confidence holding only 2-3 defensive tricks? Partner will never expect 2-3 defensive tricks in opener's hand... Do singleton ♠s scare us that much?

...yes, and in addition to Michaels is an old fashioned 3-suit takeout with a void in ♣...I lean toward Michaels.

♦9 If partner has ♣s, declarer won't. Trump lead ootq.

Thanks Neil!

♠Q trying to hit partner's length - s/he has all the entries. Pard doesn't rate to have more tha 1 or 2 ♦s.

With A K Q x K x Q 9 8 x x x x I don't - it seems to be a K light. However peeling back one more layer, IFF partner is short in ♣ and more than a min, then I am interested. The question seems to me to be whether we can locate the answer w/o by-passing 3♥. 3♥ might already be too high opposite some garbage mins, but we are NV...Just a thought.

I like 4♥ - 7-8 losers and an 8-9 card fit opposite a 6-loser hand (9 SPs).

Double sees more flexible than 5♣, while 6♠ is wishful thinking. Why can't South be 3=4=1=5? I too like 5♦ after the double to learn more about partner's shape. Bidding 6♣ would be fairly straightforward. I'm curious, was the ♠K onside too?

I like Wirgren & Lawrence's Short Suit Total approach outlined in their book "I Fought the Law of Total Tricks". Andrew Gumperz offers a distillation here: Gumps Tips Short Suit Total-1 and continued here: gumps Tips Short Suit Total-2 or see details on Wirgren's Website Separately, before trying MLTC, be sure to internalize Jeff Ruben's In and Out Valuation - A, K, and Q differ in the likelihood they will win tricks based on whether they are working together or separately, in long or short suits, and on which is in partner's suit or in a side suit. Opposite partner's 1♠ opening bid, Qxxx AKxx xxx xx > Axxx KQxx xxx xx > Axxx Kxxx Qxx xx > xxxx Axxx Kxx Qx... the Q is more likely to win a trick when in partner's suit, and less likely in an outside suit. The A is less valuable in partner's suit as a lesser honor is in on outside suit. Honors working together are more valuable. Qx, QJ, KQ, AK combinations are highly overrated.

You are right! I missed this completely... :blink:

Good thought! ...and I like your optimism! Regards, Steve

Not an issue - an opportunity... 1♠ is F1R. 1N is not. Do you want to play 1N from your side or 2♥ opposite say 1=6=34? We'll only find a minor when opener is 54. I am expecting Opener and LHO to hold no more than 5 ♠s, so I do not expect us to play in ♠s. Indeed, LHO advancer might insert 2♠ over my 1N - might be juicy...

Last I looked, 9.5 losers + 7 losers means 2♠ is 0.5 tricks too high. :blink:

2♥ - obvious. Any interest in using advancer's 2N as shortness ask? - or is this resulting too? :rolleyes:

We can disagree. Strength in ♥ is valuable on defense against their ♥ contract but does not contribute to establishing length tricks in our suits. The ♥KJT means they hold equivalent values in our suits...Not good for our offense. I much prefer ♥xxx + ♣KJT when supporting partner. Better chance my values are working. I would bid 2♠ with that holding and not the OP.

I would pass this hand in direct seat, but bid in balancing seat after 2 passes. I would bid in direct seat with ♠A109652 ♥K1084 ♦J ♣96 <-- One loser fewer, and 2♠ is my call...

Would some overcall 1♠ with this hand?

Didn't see any reference to Forcing NT above. Don't be thrown by the 8-11 HCP range for the natural nonforcing 1NT I cited. In Precision with 11 HCP opening bids, this range is the equivalent to 7-10. 6-9 doesn't work in Precision because 10-11 is not enough for a 2N bid opposite an 11 HCP opening bid. 2N should be more like 12-13... Regards, Steve

Mea culpa for ambiguous language - picture bids limit an otherwise unlimited hand. The details have already been posted. Agree Ken, Rainer, Hog. Thanks! For other readers, Andrew Gumperz has a post on Gumps Tips Picture Bids. Check it out!

[hv=d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1dp1hp2dd]133|100[/hv] 2/1 context. 2♦ rebid likely on 6... The coffeehousing discussion has identified 2 or 3 possibilities: 1) Constructive black suit takeout - too weak to double or overcall at first... 2) Opening hand (+) takeout of ♥, unable/unwilling to overcall ♠ on a 4-card suit, penalty overtones toward ♦ 3) 4=4=4=1 or 4=4=3=2 with constructive or opening (+) values. What would expert standard suggest? What do you think South holds? Regards, Steve

Strange, partner didn't make a negative double but did raise ♥ freely. Smells like 3-card support. Pass and hope partner doesn't think I'm really x=5=y=6. Ugh! I do not like the 3♥ bid. (I do like 2N showing a higher ranking 4-card suit idea....)

4♥ - for reasons already given, secretly wishing I held as little more as the ♥Q so I could bid 3♦ (or 4♦=void but none of my partners are here yet...)

I think this is a clear pass. ♥KJ are values partner expects me to have elsewhere. Since EW don't have ♥KJ they have something equivalent where we need strength in a 2♠ contract. I have no ruffing values and only 3 small ♠. Pass and hope they get too high.

As North I'd be thinking 6♠s+5♥s + 2 minor aces = 12 as an indicator we are in the slam zone if pard has primes. As South I'd be thinking that my hand has primes and 3 Trumps in support, so I would bid 3♠ not 4. I think a picture bid should have 4 trumps. I am unclear whether this pair uses picture bids by unlimited hands or not. If they do, then 100% to North. If they don't then 60% North - RKB seems cheap here.

Other - wishing for 3N instead of 3♥. Opposite a min NT a bal 18 with good internals this doesn't seem enough for 12 tricks.