PhilKing

Being able to double then bid 2♠ non-forcing is an absolutely brilliant idea. The trouble is, that when we doubled, we had no way of knowing that it would go pass-2♥-pass. leading to this convenient position. For me, this is game forcing. With an invitational hand, we bid an appropriate number of spades earlier.

Responding 2♣ on a weak hand is as old as the convention itself. I don't see why it should be alertable. It's the way I was taught to play it by my parents when I was 16, and it seems pretty standard amongst anyone who has any clue whatsoever. It is particularly obvious to preescape with a bad hand when playing a weak no trump, so all you are announcing is that you know how to play bridge.

Where is Cyberyeti when we need him?

And to make it a 3♦ rebid, you would have to change the club king to the ace. Then you are far more likely to make 3NT with 9 fast tricks opposite two red aces, for instance.

1. 3♦. TBH I can't even see the rationale for anything else. Partner can continue with three of either major (forcing) if he wants. 2. Yes.

The credential committee granted the OP full rights to post in the "expert" forum after his result in the World Pairs final in Sanya (they had apparently ignored earlier Australian national titles as "irrelevant" ;)). Anyway, I bid 2♦. I don't really agree with playing-strength based jump rebids when you need so much for game.

Pass then 3♥ if partner doubles. Particularly at these colours, there's absolutely no reason why partner should reopen with some festering pile with two small hearts. A reopening double shows a good hand or good shape in my book. It's clearer to pass in my style where all weak no trumps open 1♣.

On a DD basis I am not surprised there is about nothing in it. The reason I don't invite is basically that I do not believe it pays.

3NT.

Well it's your system, but I assume I follow with 4♥ now saying I do want to play in clubs and I really do want to know how many aces you have.

North decided he had a GF hand with 4 spades (which he doesn't) and then changed his mind, despite South showing a big hand by making a second take-out double. Personally I would also bid 2NT and then pull the double to 4♠ showing specifically an invitational hand. The grand might now be reached, but it is not easy - maybe 5♥-6♠-7♠. A direct jump to Three Spades works better, but I play that as forcing.

With 5 hearts, you should not be unilaterally keycarding for hearts even with 18 points unless you have a great suit. In that case, the answer is that I would not have started from here. Use whatever system bid shows 6 hearts in a forcing manner (eg 4♦) and then wheel out RKCB.

OK, then I guess East has come up with some sort of really weird psych to stop the spade lead against 3NT and pard has made a lead director. [hv=pc=n&s=skqt92h65d8752c43&w=sj83h74dt96ckjt98&n=sa76hkj98dkj4c765&e=s54haqt32daq3caQ2&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1hp1np2sdp]399|300[/hv] That, or South has pulled the wrong card. Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest explantion is that pard needs new glasses.

It's pretty hard to double 2♠ for penalties when you can't overcall 1♠. It might be possible if you have the hearts locked - eg AQT8x but that just doesn't stack up looking at our hand. Construction please! I can't get it to work without all 3 players bidding like maniacs. Anyway, I agree with pass. If I bid here, it's a full house.

It's because each player is dealt thirteen cards. You can try this imaginary experiment as "proof". Construct the North South hands so that you are in a grand slam missing two cards in spades - the king and the two. Now deal West the ♠2. Shuffle the remaing 25 cards and give 12 to West and 13 to East. Now you can see that the odds of East having the missing king are 13 to 12 (52% to 48%), so this is why each equal division is slightly more likely than each unequal division. So in mathematical terms, you now know why it is better (barring any table feel or other inference) to play for the drop in this situation, despite there being one case whee it succeeds and one where it fails.

My guess is that at least TWO people have bid their hand incorrectly - I just can't get it to add up with just one error. :blink:

TBH I just like voting "other" as often as possible.

It's the internet - if people want to look up what their system bids mean, they can do it anyway, so rather than try and pee into a gale, it is better for everyone to know what the bids mean. I might use different words, but the point is, the rules of live bridge are inappropriate for the on-line game unless they can be enforced. Outright cheating can be spotted in a lot of ways, but players knowing their system with artificial help (and as well as having their notes to hand they can just have FD open on their computer) cannot.

I think 1♠ is either 3 spades and no heart stop (eg 3253 15 count, or less if unbalanced) or a terrible hand with 4 spades. With a sound minimum with 4 spades, partner would bid 2♠. Anyway, since there was no heart raise, I don't expect the former hand-type, but I make the obvious continuation of 2♣ regardless. If partner has a bad 3451 I expect him to retreat to 2♠.

There's a pretty decent case for it - LHO has preempted opposite a passed hand and partner has doubled at the three level. However, I don't care for it myself. The preempt can be extremely heavy here, and partner may have stretched.

If the suit were KQJx I think the answer would be clearer, but the point is you want partner to give attitute for the ace and the ten, and the way to do that is to lead the queen. If you lead the king partner has some nasty issues when he has Tx Txx or even T9x.

In the UK, King for unblock has been the majority expert choice for as long as I can remember, but I think the "unblock the card under" style is gaining ground but we are not yet really used to all the ramifications. Playing the "unblock the card under, otherwise give attitude" style, what should one lead from KQJ8x and a side ace against 1NT all pass or 1NT-3NT? I think a team mate made the wrong choice, but I wondered if the situation was well known.

I don't understand - this seems like a trick question. Obviously I rise ace and claim 10 tricks. If I run the spade to the queen successfully, I still only have 10 tricks.

Back to the original question: No = 10 points, other = 7 points, Yes = 1 point.

So we have at least people in this thread who think 4♦ is right, yet it still only has 2 votes. :blink: You could possibly sell me 3NT if I had the ♦K instead of the queen but, as it is, I just don't see how I am going to run 9 tricks often enough. For me, the silver bullet is that when 3NT goes off, it will often be 4 or 5 off, which surely makes it a losing proposition. Edit, just seen it is matchpoints, but I just can't see 3NT making more than half the time, and some of the time when we bid 4♦ we will get to a making game (perhaps 600 v 600) or slam anyway, which a sim can only really handle if it is filtered by human eyes. And 4♦ will get us matchpoints when 3NT makes, but the reverse is not necessarily true - not everyone bids like a BBF lemming.