PhilKing

I gave this poll one star. Anyway, since I am broke, I pass.

But even where the cue is at the three level, the oppo can just double to show a raise.

But the data is from top-level imps play.

I might be being a bit thick, but how does bidding 1♥-(1♠)-2♠ force them to the four level? The (main) reason that using 2♠ to show three trumps is better is that it allows you to reach 3NT the right way up with a 5-3 fit. With four-card support, that is rarely an issue.

In SAYC it has no meaning (so natural by default). SAYC is not a system - it is a more like a large convention card for American beginners and intermediates.

Win on table and notice East's card. You don't need to form a plan until you have a feel for how the cards lie. Cash two diamonds and four clubs, ending on table. Depending on what clues you have picked up, proceed as appropriate. For instance, if West is short in clubs, you will probably go for for an endplay, but if West is long, play a heart to the nine. Don't get too caught up in the maths and keep your options open as long as possible.

Yep - missed the key element. South's 2♥ is UI to West, so it has to be 2♥-x down the max.

TBH I have no idea why I said pard has 4 spades.

That would be pretty bizarre on so many levels.

That is irrelevant, because partner is marked with 3 or 4 spades. I expect the cue bidder to be 4-5 in the rounded suits, and opener may well be as well (if he is 4-4, he would tend to find a 2NT rebid unless very concentrated), so that makes pard likely 2-2 in the round suits.

PP for East. I feels that West could tell what had happened, so I would let the result stand (North did well to double). This would be tougher had North passed it out or bid 2♠.

4♠ - must be unanimous!

Why not just alert it?

Unblocking at trick two was never on the agenda. Apart from it sending the wrong message, at this stage declarer could still have held QJ9 of diamonds. As pointed out by Bill, South had a choice of spots before the unblock, so by playing lowest then unblocking, he wants clubs. Playing the lowest card is not in itself suit preference - only when coupled with the third-round unblock. As a practical matter, it is probably best to settle for one off, but if you are part of an aspiring partnership, striving for perfection is fine unless the cost of being wrong is too high. Then it is best to just discuss how you would defend for two off if the same position comes up after you have discussed the theory behind it.

THe reg says the non-weak option needs to be at least a king above average. Whether 5-5 distribution and 11 points qualifies is a moot point.

Oh, I see. Misread question. Standard UI cheating 3♦ situation.

Correct.

If partner is 1453 he has a pretty easy 4NT bid. Basically, I think partner should sit the double if balanced, but never sit it with a stiff spade.

I would go up with the ♣Q. Now you will tend to get a more reliable signal from East. That's not likely to matter here, but it's the principle, and you never know - East may play a fatuous jack from Jx. Anyway, I intend to lead a heart next and play ace and another, but if East plays specifically the ♥T, I will finesse, since not many people will find that false-card from Tx.

It's just not a forcing pass for me - sorry. Don't play any of that forcing at red stuff. When we bid 5♠, the ball is in partners court - he either bids a slam or he doesn't. We have said we don't hold chopped liver, but lack the ability to cue - end of story. I think pard should just pot a slam (6th spade, three first round controls) and hope to make it on one of those loser on loser thingies, or maybe we make on the opening lead. It's pretty surreal that South is screwing around with better diamonds than clubs, but whatever. Their sac is cheap, so we are getting good pot odds for slam.

Ah, OK. It's called bullshit - they appear to be spewing random theory out of somewhere unpleasant, but it ain't Kokish.

Kokish was not use here at any stage - I think you need to reread what it is. And it's not a 2♣ opener anyway - you have five losers and no rebid problem after 1♠. Anyway, after 2♣-2♦2♠, why on earth would North not bid 3♦? For me, a normal auction would be: 1♠-1NT-3♦-5♦, which I play as showing good trumps and nothing else.

He can credit Shakespeare with it and it would not make it right. It's quite possible to create a comprehensive structure with simple initial responses, and follow-up clarification only when necessary. I'm sure you know that (just playing the Soloway card and ignoring both of the technical arguments is beneath you, and the reference to responder not playing in 3NT is just surreal). Seriously - this is a terrible structure for initial responses.

What has this got to do with Kokish?

North has a pretty clear 1NT response imo. The honours are not pulling their full weight, so you are not missing anything opposite a hand that will pass 1NT. I can't see any case whatsoever for 2♦ other than to prove we counted our points. Sure, we doubtless make 3NT+1 on a club lead, but that is fortuitous.