PhilKing

You have to click on the bidding diagram as if you were on BBO. The auction is not what you think, or rather it does not mean what you think.

If 3♥ is the system bid, the system needs changing. What would partner do over 3♥ with clubs? Anyway, I will try 4♠ now with no great enthusiasm. I presume 3♠ over 3♥ would just have shown values in spades (rather than cue) so I did not promise a spade control with 4♦. It is unlikely partner has waste in spades unless he has misbid.

I would reopen with 5♠. At least that way partner knows one of you suits is hearts, and it makes it easier to get to grand. Whilst stopping in five could be right, that is a mad gamble. If we assume that 11, 12 and 13 tricks are equally likely (which is too conservative imo, but bear with me), the drive six "gamble" works best, since it may (should) get us to some making sevens. The low gamble will never get us higher than five, and on a few of the hands where we can't make slam, even five will be too high.

Score was 105-45. There were a couple of unlucky boards. Eg, slam on one of two finesses, both wrong.

For me this double asks for a heart, so I lead one. So why then is my hand reaching for the ♦3? I remember a similar hand where the rationale was that if partner has a major suit ace, a diamond may concede only the twelfth trick, but if partner has the diamond ace, they have 14 tricks on top.

What's wrong with 4♣?

If you make the redouble 8+, forcing passes are out, else you will get into some grim spots (eg responder has a 2434 or 2425 shape, redoubles and 2♦ comes back to him). If you accept that, then it becomes clear to switch to take-out doubles after a redouble.

Slam makes with diamond king offside even on top spade lead: Trick 1: ♠A, discard club 2: ruff a spade 3,4,5: Clubs. If North overruffs, he is endplayed (if he had ♦K). 6: If dummy held trick 5, exit with a heart.

You can play it how you want, but it's a cue for me. Natural is fine though - you then have to play double of 1NT for take-out to cater for, say a 44M 6 count.

5♥ makes me feel ill. There are groupings of hands that wants to: 1) Bid 4♥ over 4♦. 2) Pass, intending to bid hearts on the next round (usually over a double). BTW, I had more or less this auction with Les Steel once and it did not end well (or rather it ended too quickly).

Having created all that extra room with this gadget, it seems odd that you then just have to take a blind punt. Two alternative options over 2♠: 1. Play 2NT as a forward-going noise, forcing to 3♥. Now it would continue 3♣-3♦-3♥, and you could stop sensibly in 3♥ or bash 3NT (my choice). A bad minor bids it directly. 2. Play 2NT as lebensohl, usually showing a long bad minor. That way you would bid 3♦ direct as at least a game try in hearts with diamond values. Under either scheme, you can get to decide rationally between 4♥ and 3NT when responder has enough to insist on game. Scheme 1 is my preference, since you don't have the issue of opener deciding whether to complete the lebensohl puppet to 3♣, which can muddy the water.

Adopted by whom? The International Trump Raise Federation? I've played it since before Roger was born, having been influenced by Oliver Segal, but the idea is much older. Obviously it appeared in book form in Partnership Bidding at Bridge, 1993.

Blaming partner regardless of the facts is a fairly common treatment.

I'm guessing that South doubled 3♦. Occamaments.

You don't even have to do that. Make the hand: ♠Axxx ♥xxx ♦AKxxx ♣x And it is becomes worth 2NT followed by 4♣, imo. But yeah, your point about him being wrong is correct.

This hand looks like proof that the queen never costs - even when partner has almost the nuts in diamonds and declarer has the ♥K, the heart is just as good. All leads beat it by one trick.

I would tend get to the dizzy heights of 4♠ with some conservative bidding. Aces and kings have their uses though, and passing a take-out double with a mighty trump stack of ♦7 strangely attractive, since there is no slam upside in removing to 4♠. Dummy will rarely be shapely when they do not raise, so taking the money is not ridiculous.

No - you should obviously make a profitable sacrifice. The trouble is that you do not have one - 5♠ goes for 800 and you have dubious defensive prospects against a slam.

Great spot for Lebensohl.

I'd rather double without looking at my hand. How can West bid 4NT here? Having looked at the hand, South's cards look pretty reasonable for 5♠ opposite partner's presumed 6-5 monster, so South should pass - after all, he has nothing in the minors. The fact that North's cards bear no resemblance to the bidding is just unfortunate. North will presumably then double, so there should be a happy ending. But who knows? He does not seem to be a team player judging by the bidding thus far, so anything could happen. FWIW, the double of 4NT sets up a force.

There is little need for guesswork, since Pavlicek has compared top-level play with DD play over a large sample. The defence is closer to par after trick 1, but often drop a trick on the lead (this maybe slightly bogus, since the lead sometimes only costs if declarer is also DD).

[board "46"] [West "~~M6383o9v"] [North "philking"] [East "~~M88841bw"] [south "cameron_1"] [Dealer "W"] [Vulnerable "All"] [Deal "W:4.Q4.632.KQ98532 ♠AJ83.♥KT872.♦AQ.♣74 9762.AJ93.K95.J6 ♠KQT5.♥65.♦JT874.♣AT"] [Auction "W"] 3C =1= X Pass 4C Pass 4H Pass 4S AP Here is one in a similar sequence I had the other day (practice bidding session) against the dreaded GIB bots. If you can't double on the North hand, it is not so easy.

I don't really get the point. Do you want a better adjective? Partner is allowed to take out to a suit that has already been bid, and we are allowed to double and remove clubs to diamonds.

I would pass. I think a second double starts at about a 3424 good 18. Although we have 19, this hand is junky. If partner can't bid again, that's fine. The real problem is that when we double and partner bids 2♠, he might still only have four of them, but have nothing else to bid, and he has to make a stronger move with a decent five count or so. One could play 2♥ as a double negative with 4-3 in the majors, but it is a dodgy area. If we double again and partner bids 2♠, any further move shows a rock-crusher. 3♠ for me just about does not exist, since partner has not promised five and we never have four. Edit: slightly confused by the change of 1♠ bidders, but I feel little love for this hand either way.

If. I remove 3♣ (or 2NT) to 3♦ NF. There will be many who argue that this is a matter of style, but hands like this show why it is a good idea to play ELC as not promising extras. Even playing that 3♦ shows extra, double and pass 3♣ is not the end of the world. There are many good things that could happen - partner does not always bid clubs. Try switching the West and North hands. Now North would not protect, but our double gets us to Two Spades. The fact that you learnt this as a beginner does not make it correct.