PhilKing

Deprived of my beloved 2NT relay, I will show spade support. I expect the hand to play pretty well.

Yep, true. But on the second, I bid 6♦ over 5♥ as previously mentioned.

Yes, because you could never have a situation such as: 1C 1H 4D 4NT 5H ? Where you want to play in 6♣... ♠Kxxx(x) ♥Q ♦xxx ♣Axxx(x) pard has: ♠Axxx ♥AKx ♦x ♣KQJxx One doesn't always have the luxury of a 3-level relay followed by some double RKCB extravaganza. My view is that being allowed to switch suits after RKCB is WAY more useful than losing one of your grand slam tries.

Well I understand what he means, but it is not for me to explain ...

I think you should have a default rule that 6♣ in this kind of auction is to play (or at least offering choice). Usually you have another option to look for grand, although you may need to be a little creative. In this instance, you could bid 6♦ - since partner has show a singleton diamond, you can't be asking about that suit, so partner can work out that you need the ♣Q for grand.

Stiff 9 doesn't help you either, since you have to set up a diamond trick in order to pick up the putative KQxx.

2any-pass-pass-dbl pass-? Regardless of whether the doubler is a passed hand.

I don't think it is as clear as that. Say we overtake a diamond and hook a club and, if it holds cash the club ace. If West blows we still have some play for the contract by hooking the spade (JTx West or JT tight in either hand).

I also like to play the transfer as FG and completion to show a 3-card fit. However, I strongly disagree that being locked into the major is a good idea. We still need a way of getting to 3NT and playing slam in another suit.

Yep, natural 2NT for me (3♣ is also fine). When there has been no raise and a protective double, our average spade length is just under four and our average point count is about 12 or so. Call me crazy, but it seems daft not to have a bid that reflects that. I think partner rates to have a doubleton spade more often than not, so we can often shut out the spades. If partner is 1444 I should bid 3♣, but if he has short spades and a reasonable five card suit, he can pull 2NT to his suit.

There are a few factors that lean me towards that explanation: 1. South did not ask the meaning of 1♦. As pointed out by Aardv, just because it is alerted does not make it conventional. 2. South's hand. 3. The far-fetched nature of South's explanation. A deliberate psyche here is just so unlikely unless South is in the habit of making ridiculous bids that have a close to zero chance of success.

Well I know at least one country that did ...

I might be being a bit dense, but I can't think of that many hands where game is not reasonable opposite a short suit game try. But I'm not going to throw stones and call anyone a bean counter. B-)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2814362/ Tim Roth, Sam Neill, Gerard Depardieu - what were you thinking?

If the megaquiz taught us anything, it was to bid over 4♥ with good shape and let nature take its course. Partner won't hang us. The danger of passing is that partner needs quite a lot to make a second double.

The "answer" is between 0% and 100%. Theoretically, if you play a one board match and slam is on a finesse, you are simply in the lap of the gods - skill does not come into it. In the infinite long term, skill is king - the best player or team will win.

OK try this one, which I had in a practice match a few weeks ago. Game all, quite good opposition (Bertheau/Hallberg): ♠KQJ62 ♥542 ♦QJ9 ♣KQ Obviously it starts 1♥-p-1NT. Do you overcall? Do you intend to balance if 2♣/♦/♥ come back to you ... I believe you have to be ultra cautious when you have the death holding in hearts. Anyway, if you overcall 2♠ directly it gets whacked for 800. If you pass, it goes 2♣-p-3♣ and declarer scrambles 9 tricks with neat play (he has bid 2♣ on a decent 4513 hand).

But if you have to start assigning points, you need to finish the job. Partner has made a non space consuming overcall vulnerable. His range is 9-18 on that basis, giving an average of about 12 or 13. Therefore the deck is crooked ... I don't see why you would trust an opponent to have 8 points for his 1♠ bid playing opposite a limited opener - responder can be planning to remove 1NT to show both minors. Anyway, it's all pretty irrelevant. Double then 3♠ gives an excellent description of our hand, suggesting that partner raise with anything anything resembling a hand.

What?

I always thought it a shame that the inventors of Acol weren't Skid Marx and Jack Simon. :ph34r:

There is a Kelsey hand like this, borrowed by Martens ...

Pass in a voice of thunder.

I find this particular money challenge in poor taste - the original offer, as I recall, was for PhilG007 and a partner of his choice (it can be Madala as far as I am concerned) to take on me and MikeH at suitable stakes. Any attept to hijack this is just not on! :angry:

There is a key piece of information missing - were we first or second in hand? In second seat, this is a clear pass against aggressive opponents. Third seat is marked with a bust. Any player worth his salt will surely psyche. At our next go, we can double in a voice of thunder!

FWIW, if I held this hand at rubber bridge (in a very strong game), I would bid 2♠. This still has the old-fashioned meaning - game values and a very distributional hand. We can't be certain game is on, but it has play opposite most zero counts.