PhilKing

FWIW, Wests bidding in the other room was consistent with KQxxx xx x AKxxx. But that's OK because he opened a spade and showed a diamond control. The auction in which they could count 13 tricks was clearly worse, because they opened the wrong suit and made the wrong cue bid.

zzzzzzzzzzz

I was entertained. Does anyone know where Foo plays for money?

And now I bid 4♠. ;) :ph34r:

This is turning into the worst thread ever.

East has a clear sign-off for me. Steve Bloom's suggested hand (KQxx xxx Ax AKxx) does not resonate. Partner bids a suit in which he requires no help yet I am supposed to bid ten to five?

I double 3♦.

It wasn't, but congratulations. :P

That's usually a sound investment.

So what did partner have?

I am probably going to regret answering based on the tone of your post, but ... Just because most people open 1♠ does not mean 1♣ is terrible. Here it gained a lot of room and definition - contrast this start with 1♠-2♥-2♠ and note how much of a worse position we are in compared with 1♣-1♥-1♠-2♦-2♠. Playing up the line cues is fine, but it's not the only way. If you cue 4♦ you can't show the heart king below the five level, yet heart king is relatively more important. Over 4♥ partner can count 13 tricks opposite the ♣AK regardless of the diamond position since in their style you don't cue a shortage in partner's suit. Lacking a diamond control partner can bid 4♠, since in their style style, they have not denied one. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that when they bid 4♥ they were using something called "judgment".

If partner had not endplayed you, you don't get a spade trick. On a club switch, declarer just rises ace, crosses with a heart and cashes the long diamond.

Assuming fourth highest leads, partner also knows from our card at trick one that declarer is 3541 and holds AKx of spades (declarer should have won with the king) and he knows that we know. So the club ten is suit preference for hearts rather than count or Smith. :ph34r: I play a low heart which holds it to three since declarer has AKx Txxxx AKQx x and partner Jxxx Qx xxxx Txx. From the comfort of my ivory tower, I think partner plays his lowest card with a diamond card (in which case I cash the heart king and then play a diamond, holding declarer to nine even when he has the ace). The middle card shows equal or neither. And if my ox is wearing non-matching socks or a dodgy christmas jumper I think the director should be called.

When bidding natural 2NT, I do not generally stand on my chair and shout "bullseye". Other contracts are still available, and by making a natural call that describes my hand, I allow partner to select or explore for that contract. By giving up a natural 2NT you screw yourself when you have, of all things, a hand that does not have primary support for partners suit, has a stop (very likely when there is no enemy raise), but not enough for game. And for what? To Lebensohl out to three of a minor? If you wanted to play 2NT natural and forcing, well that I could understand ...

Have you tried googling it?

That's the standard meaning when an unlimited hand bids 4♦ over 3NT, so in that sense you are correct. And yes, it is prone to misunderstanding if one does not recognise the distinction.

.

Not sure about "normally" but I play it as natural and non-forcing. But as bid, I seem to be on the same wavelength as partner, so I'll bid Four Spades. Maybe he has: ♠QJTx ♥xxx ♦A ♣AKQxx After all, he clearly has short diamonds (no take-out double) and a good hand (he bid three hearts), so I bid what I can make.

You evaluated the strength of your hand as well as you could for no trumps. Your partner should have passed 4NT. He had no more than he said when he bid 4♦, and your reversion to 4NT strongly suggests a 3325 shape or a dead minimum if you have three diamonds. I would have rebid 3♣ on your hand, though, since its actual worth is strongly dependent on the level of fit. I can't help but imagining partner holding ♠Jxxx ♥xx ♦Axx ♣xxxx when you will languish in 3NT when a strong favourite for seven.

We have shown: ♠AKxx ♥Q ♦ATx ♣AJTxx or similar. With two or more hearts, we would just just raise. We can almost underwrite 3♥ but do not want to overstress our support. 3♦ also keeps 3NT in the game when pard has ♠xx ♥ATxxxx ♦Jxx ♣Kx. Partner has bid correctly in jumping to 4♥ and it was careless to leave him stewing there when righty advertised four trump tricks.

5♠. Follow ups all planned ... There is a case for 4NT (take-out) to gauge partner's shape. If he shows a second suit I am very interested grand, but the trouble is I don't get to agree diamonds. I'm never stopping out of 6, obviously, so I should mae my intentions clear. The advantage of 5♠ is that it sets trumps and show interest in grand, but I may have to commit to 6NT to explore effectively.

Name a hand where we have our 3♦ bid and yet 4♥ is poor from partner's perspective (assuming we could bid 2♠ nat GF over 1♥). 3♦ cannot logically be game forcing. He can't bid 3NT, he can't bid game in a black suit, yet it looks like we can make 10 or 11 tricks in hearts, how can we lose 4 tricks without bad luck or bad breaks? 3♥ would just be pusillanimous (though I am still not saying partner could not bid it B-) ).

He agreed to play it as take-out, but ended up doing it with a penalty double anyway, so we have all had to fall in line when playing with Gunnar and double for blood. :ph34r:

Assuming 2♠ over 1♥ is, of all things, natural and forcing, what possible hand can we have for 3♦ containing a void heart having bid only 1♠? Not saying partner should not bid 3♥, but in a scratch partnership, the jump to four does not make the top three crimes in the auction, passing 4♥ doubled being the worst imo.

In UK you are allowed any defence if 1C is 2+. 1NT is legal regardless because promises an anchor suit. 1D illegal against 3+ club.