PhilKing

♦Q. One time dealer!

I can't point you towards the notes, but I have a few observations: 2♣ is certainly NOT Gazilli. You can't do everything! It's a transfer to diamonds. The point of transfers is that opener gets another go, so he can bid his strong Gazilli hands "naturally", which is superior imo. You have to pass 1NT with minimum balanced hands - you just can't show them in a transfer structure. There is a big gap when showing clubs, to which there are a few "solutions", but none are close to perfect. Opener can pass 1NT with minimum 5224 hands. This way, a bid of 2♠ can show extra strength or decent shape, but sorting out the right spot after this start is not easy. When I coached Townsend/Gold, they played a 2♠ opening when vulnerable as 5♠4+♣ and a minimum opening (when nv, they were unwilling to give up their 2♠ toy showing a bad preempt in any suit), so 1♠-1NT-2♠ is invitational with clubs. A jump to 3♣ has to be forcing, but jumps to 3♦ and 3♥ are invitational. Back to the sequence you saw - 2♥ is just a transfer to 2♠. The point of this is that opener can follow up with a new suit to show a shortage and invitational or better values, or 2NT to show 6 spades and a balanced invite. This is a huge increase in efficiency over standard or Gazilli when it comes to bidding strong hands with six spades.

3♦ is weak. I mean, what would you bid on: ♠Axxxx ♥xx ♦AKJx ♣xx If you bid 2♠, no one will understand or sympathise. Partners double indicates the minors so we bid 3♦, "limiting our hand". And if we have a strong hand, we simply make a strong bid.

Against a weak pair, pretty much always 3♣. I would basically never psyche against a weak pair. Against a good pair I would open 1NT for sure if they were playing a conventional defence. I might open 1♣ otherwise, since I don't want to tip my whole hand. The auction may well indicate that I am weak, so I get my lead director in without declarer getting to play double dummy. edit: I forgot about 2NT, so 0 15 60 15 10

But on the second round, doubling 1NT with no high cards is absolutely fine. :blink:

5♥ is absolutely crackers. Partner has five hearts exactly never. For me, the prototype shape for the double of 1NT is 1444 with about 13 or more points. If partner had more length in the red suits he would have bid over 1♣. This auction is impossible.

I would pass, but it depends how you use non-serious. My view is that bidding 4♠ shows a horrible hand for slam. ♠AQJxxx ♥Kxx ♦xx ♣xx, may be a minimum opening, but it's quite a decent hand if partner is interested in slam, so I would bid a non-serious 3NT and then cue 4♥. Partner can still bid 4♠ if he needs me to have a good hand in context.

Meckstroth/Rodwell did exactly this for quite a long time (alerted, of course). It was known as a "poker raise", as I recall. They don't do it any more.

I don't think this is technically consistent. Put it this way, passing first time does not rate to be a good idea if there is only one subsequent auction after which we can show our hand. It seem to me much better for a delayed double to show a good hand with short spades in BOTH sequences. For a start, I don't think there is much utility in a delayed pure penalty double of 1NT, and I think it is better both for catching them or allowing an escape route, or for bidding a good contract our way, to play the delayed double as this kind of hand. I don't think the hand needs to be as good as this, but every extra value helps. ;)

The hand is clearly worth a serious 3NT. But say partner cues 4♣ and we bid 4♦, I would respect a 4♠ sign off, since partner will never do that with three key cards. Anyway, it produced a comic sequence for a pair playing in my regular team (I was guesting for another team). 1♥-2♣-2♠-3♠-4♠. :ph34r: :o

I pass, since I only have one high card. But I want to know what Karlson would do ...

You are comparing apples and pears. In a four card major system, the Crowhurst solution, in which the lower cue showed the fourth suit plus tolerance for partner, made much more sense.

Well that's two advantages. How many do you need? Just kidding - I know you can't use step one for both ... ;) We are slightly off topic, but after 1H 2NT 3C, I would play 3D as specifically a game try, 3S as a artificial mild slam try, and 3NT+ as strong tries. After, 1H 2NT 3D I can bid 3H/S/NT natural and 4C/D to show slam tries in spades. My main computer is back in hospital, but I will check it for relevant situations.

I think your partner is along the right lines. The point is that if you play 2NT as LR+, something has to give. My choice is to give up stopping in part score if opener has an unbalanced hand. Then the following becomes pretty efficient: 3♣ = almost all hands with no shortage 3♦/♥/♠ = stepped shortages 3NT = 6M extras no shortage after 3♣, responder can show the LR, relay for exact shape, or show a shortage. Simple and effective.

So there are basically 3 approaches to the "2 cue bids" situation: 1. Lower for lower. 2. Lower for fourth suit. 3. Lower to show the raise. I play number 3. The reason I prefer that method is that, in my experience, the good raise is way more frequent than the good hand with the fourth suit. This is particularly true opposite a major suit, of course, but it would be madness to change our approach depending on which suit is opened. As an aside, I use 2NT here as showing both minors and limited, so here it would tend to show 5+ clubs and 3 diamonds (or possibly 45 if you open a diamond on three).

I have four big cards, maybe five. I'm just going to go for all the marbles here. 5NT - pick a slam. 4♦ is a decent shot as well, since it might help get us to the 4-3 fit.

Yep, pass.

And back to question 1, I think a raise to 3♥ should promise 5 trumps, since when we are very strong partner often has 3 trumps here. I suspect in a vacuum I would play 2♠ as naturalish (eg 5413 or 5404 strong) and 3♦ as a 4-card raise.

Pass. With an extra point I might make a raise. B-)

I think you may have misread it. Responder has denied a major and opener has not promised one and he has denied five - he can be 33 or 32 in the majors. He has merely denied holding 23 in the majors.

"Or similar" could mean removing partner's ♠Q ♥QJ ♦KQJ and giving him one high card in return - the ♦A! If one is doing card placing, one should also include all the below average hands partner can hold that make us stiff for game. Nothing is certain in this game, but trying to find a winning lead against 3♣ on a hand like just can't be a viable long-term strategy.

The simple reason is that if partner has about 11 points and 3 hearts he should just raise 1♥ to 3♥ (which barring a specific agreement is just invitational), in the first place.

I would make a simple overcall on both. This seems obvious, but I still hope I would win by doing better on the other boards ... ;)

Always include the auction. We need to know why they led a club and what they know about our hand. Anyway, without looking at it too closely, if West has led away from the club king, it looks like a guard squeeze type thingy, morphing into a simultaneous double and a position may emerge if East has the club king as well.

A double of 2♥ would be rather poor imo - I don't think it should ever be done with prime support, since you generally end up having to do something unilateral later on. I think he has a clear 3♥ bid, showing a good raise to at least 4♣. It would be rather easy to reach 4♠ after that start. Anyway, partner's first action was superb when compared to the double of 4♥. :ph34r: The 2♣ overcall deserved a better fate, but I much prefer masterminding with 1♠ opposite a weak partner. Being vulnerable puts me off a bit though, and I would tend to prefer 2♣ with a decent partner.