PhilKing

Let's keep this one under our hat, shall we? I don't think we should tell them everything ...

Whether you would rebid 2♣ or not is neither here nor there. The point is that after 1♣-1♦, 2♣ promises 6, allowing partner to just jump to 3NT on something like ♠Axx ♥Axx ♦Jxxxx ♣Qx. In T-Walsh the 2♣ rebid is very loose in both strength and shape, resulting in inevitable loss of subsequent accuracy. Now obviously on the hand I gave you can move with 2NT and generally get to 3 when its right, but you can't make very light moves in the knowledge that partner has 6 (eg ♠Axx ♥xxx ♦xxxxx ♣KQ), and you will often have to move on indifferent 10 counts that might have just bid 1c-1d-1s-1nt.

I like to play 3♥ as doubt about hearts. Here I would bid 3NT and reach for my scorecard.

It's hardly zero gain just because partner cannot have the suit. Play them a bit longer and you might get dealt: ♠AQxx ♥AQx ♦x ♣txxxx or ♠AQxx ♥AQx ♦x ♣Kxxxx. And when we have reversing values, we are continuing the bidding one level higher, which can only hurt the accuracy of our partscore, game and slam bidding. By rebidding 1NT after a 1♠ response (or guessing to rebid 2♣) on the hands I gave above, we are often going to be in a worse spot, and are less well defined when partner has enough to explore further. In "standard", when we rebid 2♣ or 1NT over 1♦ our hand is much more accurately defined.

K♦, ♠. This looks right even if partner switches to the ♦T (which he should if he has it, since declarer could be 5332). We know declarer's shape, and this is our last chance to play a spade, breaking up the strip squeeze, so we must win the first round of diamonds. Declarer can get rid of a spade or a club on the diamond winner, but not both. Hoping South has ♠AQx ♥AQxxx ♦Tx ♣A7x or similar.

The "normal reverse" gets you to the three level on hands where natural bidding sometimes goes 1♣-1♦-1♠-P (I know that's rare in Australia, but it can happen where 1M is not forcing). After a reverse, Lebensohl often spews you out to 3♣ in a 5-2 fit when responder is weak. When responder just completes to 2M there is another spin-off benefit - opener can infer that responder has 5 diammonds, so he can bid 3♦ forcing or just leb out to 3♦ as appropriate.

Building a system around being able to show diamonds cheaply might not be optimal.

However one plays it, the One Spade response to One Club is the Achilles Heel of Transfer Walsh. Hands that would have started 1♣-1♦1♥, for instance now have to bid rebid 1NT, 2♣ or 2♥ over 1♠. An attractive solution, particularly if One Spade promises diamonds, is to play transfer reverses: 2♦ = hearts 2♥ = spades 2♠ = diamonds (direct 3♦ weak) Over 2♦ and 2♥ responder just completes to two of the major with a minimum response with 3-card support, so with a 2425 17 count opposite a 3352 6-count, you can stop in a decent contract. The method allows you to reverse pretty light, taking the pressure off the 1NT and 2♣ rebids.

Nah - I'm a spiral scan man when my first key card ask is below 4M but have yet to ask for a jack in anger, and I play Kantar (more or less) by the book after standard RKCB.

That's why some of us play Four Clubs as RKCB here, since on a good day we can ask for tens.

The method whereby bidding 7NT is right involves partner jumping to Six Hearts with a concealed ♣Q as well (hence the 15 top tricks reference).

I like how he punished them by passing Four Spades - I am presuming Sementa would never pull his double.

I would bid 5NT with an an eighth heart (eg KjTxxxxx) or KQ to seven and a side queen. This leaves room for 6 minor to ask for a filler (eg 6c-7c to show the queen, or 6c-7H to just show eight hearts). No way partner has KQ to eight here, so 7NT is a real punt. If partner did bid 5NT, I am jumping to 7NT, since worst case scenarion is that he has the diamond queen. Here, he has denied better than KQ(J)xxxx and out.

It's not common practice in International play. Here are two examples of heavy or simply weird 4♥ openings from my pre-empt database (from USBC, World Championships and European Championship, 2000-). First the weird: 1) Angelini playing with Sementa in a European Championship opened Four Hearts first seat at game all with: ♠A5 ♥KT96532 ♦93 ♣AK. It went 4♠ on his left passed backed to him and he passed. That was two off for win nine versus Two Spades making four on soft defence. 2) Wolff opened Four Hearts on ♠32 ♥AKQJT542 ♦Q86 ♣- first in at love all in a USBC and missed a cold slam (which should have easily been bid in the other room after a One Heart opening (Larsen).

Almost never doubling here. Name a hand that passes 2 Diamonds, doubles 2 Spades (for penalties) and is remotely likely.

I guess it's massively wrong not to finesse immediately if West can falsecard. But it's a huge play to find from Jx, but maybe easier from Tx. My line is terrible against world-class defenders.

We can't afford to cross, I think.

I am assuming they led a club. Cashing ace first to see if the J or T appears on the left looks best. If so, we just lead a low spade from hand (crossing to table is dangerous if East is 37 in the blacks). On balance this gains on one more combination than the finesse line (it wins with KJ or KT on left, and loses to JT). Running the 9 in case East does not cover with JT6 is not so bad either. It also leads to some interesting situations on the second round. Say it goes nine, small, small jack. You win the exit in dummy and lead a low spade - does East play the T from T7 now? Clearly, we should be in 6 Spades by North, which would make the play of a low spade away from the AQ less terrible (it's an almighty egg-on-face-extravaganza when East has JT doubleton, but it's much worse than that, since we have to cross in a red suit, potentially setting up a ruff in order to butcher trumps).

Maybe their hands rarely conform to the opponent's expectation. Just a thought.

Fwiw I am bidding 2NT then 3NT to offer a choice of games in case partner has ♠Jx ♥AKJxxx ♦xxx ♣xx or other similar monster overcalls. When partner overcalls a minor and they raise, it is better to reverse the meaning of 2NT and raise (raise = inv), the main reason being that we may need to play 3NT by partner when we have a constructive raise.

I assume reading this thread counts as unfortunate.

Best is 1NT two-way: 18-19 bal or void in their suit, minimum values, can't stand a penalty pass This treatment comes with a guarantee that partner will be able to work out which hand-type you have except against people who make psychic passes of overcalls. But I guess it won't make it into the next SAYC update ...

Reverse good/bad 2NT solves this: 2NT(at least a good 3♣ bid)-3♦(values GF)-6♣

2♣ two-way is best, I think, since it provides enough room to stop at the 2-level with the good 3-card raise without unduly interfering with 2/1. I introduced the Hacketts to this gadget in 1995, but they play inefficient continuations ... Best is 2♦ "bucket" including 1) 11-13 bal, 2) natural or 3) a bad raise to 3♣. The essence of the structure is that the unbalanced raise simply punts game over anything other than 2♦ leaving other sequences untainted. Over 2♦, responder bids 2M with the 10-11 unbal 3M raise, 2OM as a relay etc. One could create more ways of stopping below game, but if you aren't happy to punt a few thin ones when both players have a 5431 10-11 count, then I doubt a Hackett-style system is for you. Also, you should include 10-bad 11 HCP bal with 4 trumps in the 2♣ response, since you definitely want to stop low opposite the 11-13 bal.

Since I play equal level conversion as non-forcing (eg ♠xx AQxx AQTxx Jx) and a raise to 4♣ as forcing (>>>> better than non-forcing), then I would typically have a good 0463 hand. What does one do with a non-forcing raise to 4♣? Well, usually just bid 5, but alternatively bid 3♠ intending to Pass 3NT or 4♣. In this scheme, partner's retreat to 4♣ shows a non-descript minimum with no stop. So it's a lone vote for "scramble".