PhilKing

Can anyone do a sim? I still think this must be pretty close betwen the majors with the minor suits as also-rans.

Just a guess, but I suspect 2♥ has a neutral expected value on the first (playing strength is good, which is the number one consideration, but we have the death holding in spades along with the other obvious flaws) and a small loser on the second. On the first hand, I quite like pass then 2♥, but I play it as showing hearts and spades, in order to stop me partners balancing with trash and going for a number. :ph34r:

I don't mind the 5♣ bid - you need partner to have a lot of controls for slam, and a cue bidding auction may tip the winning lead. Say we bid 4♣ and partner bids 4♥. Now what? Do we sign off? If you say we must have a diamond control for that, on the grounds we must have something, I don't agree: ♠xx ♥Kx ♦Qx ♣AKJxxxx Seems totally fine. I play 4NT over 4♥ as showing a diamond control ("rolling" or "DI"), but most don't. And I can imagine partner now just auto-bidding slam because he thinks he must go on with a spade control. 4♣ does not guarantee an accurate auction. Most are foaming at the mouth about the 5♣ jump, but MikeH is the only one to come up with a construction to back this up, which I reject for the same reasons as MrAce. For me, 5♣: A) Shows excellent shape (we have that). B) Denies a diamond or spade shortage (we would splinter), ergo we have short hearts, but I think this is overwhelmingly likely to be a singleton, since otherwise it contains too many side losers to venture past 3NT. C) It shows a high card minimum for 2♣. This should mean it rates to have an outside king, but I do not say it is guaranteed. But anyway, even if slam could go down on the right lead, it may gin up when they guess wrong. D) Is NOT a request to just put the dummy down whilst tilting about the barbaric route we have chosen.

I lead a spart.

I must be being a bit thick, since I take the same line at IMPs or MPs.

I'd bid 6♣. Partner clearly has a lot of shape, but minimum high cards and poor controls. Putting that together I expect slam to be good most of the time and possibly laydown, but there are no guarantees in an auction like this.

I'd certainly whack 2♣, and would expect that to score more than slam quite a lot of the time. My alternative is 4NT, quantitative, over 2♣. I would go for that if the vulnerability was reversed.

Obviously the fact that we have 4 clubs increases the chance that partner dos not hold length, but there is another huge factor at work - RHO's pass over 1♣. Particularly if we are very weak, then RHO's pass over 1♣ becomes the equivalent of the dog that didn't bark. If partner had long clubs, the chances of RHO not being able to overcall are pretty small, so the profile of hands becomes skewed towards partner holding a balanced hand with relatively short clubs.

Since the hand only becomes worth a good fifteen if partner has a diamond fit, I would hope the answer was yes.

People answered the problem as set - how silly of us. With the overcall, Fluffy is right, though he probably meant 2614 given West followed to the second heart. Pitch a club form dummy and play a club to the ace. If West blows, cash two spades - if East follows to those, cash the diamond ace hopefully dropping a singleton honour with East. now after a diamond to the nine we can catch West in the ending. If East has one spade we need him to have JT tight in diamonds. And if East blows on the diamond ace we can play a diamond up and claim on the 33 spade break.

It's so standard even the top French players do it.

In before the police say this is in the wrong forum ... But while there is time, I will cash a few spades, and if nothing extaordinary happens (East may be triple squeezed and do something absurd) play ace and another club.

After 1NT-X-2m, my view is that it is worth an insane amount to play double for takeout and pass as non-forcing. In the UK, this kind of auction is commonplace, in fact it occurred on Sunday in the Tollemache ... You double a weak NT with: ♠J62 ♥AK9 ♦A95 ♣K954 Pretty borderline, I admit, but they are vul and you are not. Anyway, it goes 2♣-P-P where partner's double is for takeout. If you pass this out, it's a huge goal as lefty has: ♠KT93 ♥QT642 ♦Q76 ♣8 But if pass is forcing, lefty can bid 2♣ for no cost, as we can't float it. Partner has: ♠8 ♥J7 ♦JT32 ♣QJ7632 You should pass out 2♣ for zillions off, yet the absurd forcing pass theory forces you to act. Many of us gave this up 25 years ago, but the theory still persists.

Lefty was very strong and they were playing pretty a pretty standard system. I know a raise to 3♣ would be semi pre, since it came up on another board, but I don't know about 2♣. Righty pitched a spade on the last diamond. Very pretty, and the ending can't be misguessed I think.

Well I think the point is there not much hurry to cash the third heart, particularly if opener can be 4432. After two rounds of hearts hold and the ♦K loses to the ace, lefty clears spades (he started with KT92). You can win the second or third spade and continue diamonds. This gives up on the 4414 (and 4315, which may have led a club) stiff ace position, but otherwise is OK as long as you read the ending, and my view is that it is incredibly difficult for them to conceal the distribution when the position is this tight. Righty wins the third diamond, West pitching an encouraging ♣2, and East plays the ♣J. You win the ace and West follows with the nine. Now you cash the fourth diamond and West pitches a spade winner ... In hearts, West followed 63 saying he liked spades, and East followed 47, saying he didn't. Now you don't actually have a full count, but I think one of the two possible shapes is now an overwhelming favourite.

Once we knock out the diamond, it depends what happens next. Say East switches to the spade king, then we can't afford to cash any hearts. We basically play it as a classic show up squeeze, hoping East is 3442 or similar with KQx and any four card heart holding. This may seem unlikely, since it gives West six clubs, but the weaker their hand is, the more likely some players are to "fish" for their partner's suit. Say East switches to the spade ten, we are in the same position. Although its no longer a show up squeeze (it's just a potential squeeze against West) we can no longer safely finesse the heart, so we just have to play winners ending in dummy and hope the hearts are now good. In neither case are we cashing hearts first, and it's right exactly never when compared to the line stated here. If East plays a heart, it gets more debatable, but unless a wooden East switches to the ♥2, I am unlikely to do anything other than cash the ♠A and play the squeeze line anyway.

This is not necessarily true. The indignity of going off with Qxx onside is still available!

I'd be interested to see anything resmbling a rational reason for bidding again in any of these auctions. What on earth are you playing partner to have?

It's definitely not close - I bid 2NT in case partner is about to bid, for instance, a forcing 3♥. I don't see how 2NT can be passed here.

Auction was same at my table but information was slightly different - they would open 1♦ with a 4432 shape, so that means there is one fewer pattern where eating the second heart is successful.

Yet it is generally referred to as a show-up squeeze.

I sat in the right seat in that I played TE and W. B-) It's all sorted now.

Well I have gone through all of Saturday and mine are wrong by a huge margin.

Maybe I'm being a bit thick, but the figures look like a total joke. (Mine look to be wrong by about an imp a board for the Saturday).

I would just cross to a diamond and run the ♠T. This just pays off to West being 2722 with ♠Jx, which I don't think is that likely.