PhilKing

Double. This hand is often about whether we can compete to three of a major over 3♦. And note that the 2♦ bid is by a passed hand.

We have found him. 2♥ is the bid of a crazy man.

Pass then 3♠.

3♥ f1. Pass 3NT, bid 4♦ NF over 4♣. Forcing diamond hands raise directly to 4♦. I know everyone plays cue followed by 4♦ as forcing, but that is the wrong way round. You should be able to look for 3NT without having to bid 5m when 3NT is not an option.

I am genuinely impressed. Obviously, after 3♣-3♦ it is better for the preempter to bid 3♥ with three spades and 3♠ with three hearts, but I assume he thought (wrongly - shame on you, Roland!) that you were not ready. As you correctly noted, for responder to end up playing the hand would not be optimal. Best is for 3♥ to show no 3-card major (3♠ now asks for good clubs), 3♠ to show three hearts and 3NT to show three spades, but the world is not ready. That way you get no trumps played the right way up as well, and when the 3♣ opener has 3♠, it may be right for 3NT to be played from his side.

My experience is that RHO has three diamonds more often than four in this auction (with four he will strive to raise). When he has three diamonds, he has zero or one spade, so partner could be 54 or 64 in the pointed suits. And this is the kind of auction where they could easily have 17 opposite 8. Ugly isn't it? Also, we have nothing, and that argues in favour of pass ...

OK, OK! I bid 4♥. I'm sorry for all the cherry picking. All the evidence suggest pard has a weak NT with four hearts. If he doubles 4♥, fine. If he does not, I will take the push. Phil is mad, or has a mad partner. I have no idea what he did, but presumably it was something crazy, hence the thread. Maybe he relayed.

My bad! Partner is balanced, obviously, probably with some stuff in spades ... ♠Kxxx ♥AQxx ♦xxx ♣Ax And I haven't said what I do yet - I am sitting on the fence until I see the hand or pick up more clues.

We rise with the ace and claim ten tricks, obviously. We always make exactly ten trick when the club loses, hence 33.33%. I think his figure for 11 tricks is basically 1/4 x 2/3 (16.66%) - ie the club finesse wins but West has both diamond honours, but higher against an overly aggressive leader. There is a vacant spaces issue hence the word "roughly" followed by a decimal. B-)

This hand is an advert for 2M showing 8-11.

Didn't mean partner couldn't bid a four carder. He can with strong pips, but in my style he is aware that I will almost never have four spades, so he does it as a matter of judgment. And if you want to reopen with two or 3 diamonds with a 3541 16 count (absurd, obviously) then feel free!

Overcalling 1♥ is not all sweetness and light. Take the sequence (1♣)-1♥-)2/3♣)-p-(p)-x. Now if double showed four spades, that would be brilliant, but it doesn't. We could be 3631 or 3541 or 3532, so partner has can't safely bid spades on a four-card suit. The way I play it, overcalling hearts almost denies four spades. Also, my overcall then double sequence shows greater high-card power or four diamonds, since I am doubling first with this hand type. For me, the overcall drops the ball when it comes to spade contracts.

We are almost cold for Six Clubs if partner is unbalalanced. eg Jxx Axx x AKxxxx I would ask whether the delayed take-out was systemically 3-suited with opening values or spades and diamonds and potentially much lighter.

My head has literally just exploded.

5♣ is any easy 500. South gives SP for diamonds at trick 1.

5♠ is barking mad.

That lets it through when partner has KT9xx in spades.

I wondered about that possibility, but obviously dismissed it when partner played the ♦2. Thank you partner! :angry:

Any simulation in Jack will be skewed here, because if Jack played on diamonds, it will always make the correct decision on the third round of the suit when East follows (ruffing high when necessary).

I can't really, because it contains many hands from books and magazines that I own, so can use for my own purposes, but would not feel comfortable distributing in the current format (even though legally I could, since hands are not subject to copyright).

I don't agree it really helps. Say all you had was hearts and maybe one outside card. You pass the next bid round to partner, who doubles. If your pass was forcing, he has to double more often - amost every time he has four. But if pass is non-forcing you know he means it. And if you have hearts and plenty of outside stuff, you can just double yourself.

I have over 3000 partially analysed hands in my database that I play against Jack ... The auctions are pre-loaded and sometimes the first trick or two. Then it is man against machine.

That's why West has to double 2NT. A decent balanced 14 is plenty for this. Passing and then bidding 3♥ is the worst of all worlds - bad suit, good defence, and more points than partner will expect. It's awful.

Let's assume for the moment that it was difficult for E/W to punish 4♣ when the cards were distributed as on this occasion (although I dispute that, since West should be allowed to double 2NT with a good 14 against mini-no trumpers just to show any 14+). That does not mean that 4♣ is sensible. My guess is that you can expect to be doubled way more often than not against decent opponents when the E/W cards are distributed slightly differently, as indeed they should be. For me, West dropped the ball.

FWIW I don't play any of these auctions as forcing.