PhilKing

Just to add that if he signals for a heart, indicating the second hand, we switch to the ♥9, which should show count, so that partner can switch back to diamonds. We need the heart trick in the bank before going for our trump promotion.

It depends. If you are the stronger team, you should tend to put your strong pair in the same seats as there strong pair. The reason is to reduce variance. Imagine all the tough slams and play problems etc are in a particular direction and you will see the effect. However, it depends more on the personalities. In one team I play on the weakest player plays much better against good pairs, and on another, the best pair is at their best against weak pairs, so that tends to override other considerations, although they would hopefully tend to coincide.

Tricks are magically generated by a wizard who lives on top of a mountain.

I think 2♦ causes problems over a loose overloaded 1♣ primarily on partscore deals due to incorrect coutermeasures. It's pretty clear imo to play 2M as non-forcing, since opener frequently has a weak no trump, and play 2NT+ as transfers. This removes the pressure on opener and is pretty smooth. If I played 2♦ as natural, I would play it as 8-12, which is more frequent and more likely to put responder in no-mans land. When the opening side has game values, no amount of jacking around is really going to discombobulate them too much, so bidding weak hands causes only infrequent problems. Our efforts are best geared towards bashing them up on the partscores, whilst retaining constructive potential. A way to do this is to make our hurtful interventions sufficiently informative that we are way ahead of them on a descriptive level, but close to level in terms of strength. For instance, suppose we played a 2♥ overcall to show four hearts, five of a minor and about 10-14 points then we place responder in a bind. Say he has a 4324 seven count, he can compete and get his head served on a plate opposite an unsuitable weak NT or pass and miss an obvious partscore. The same applies if he is 5332.

Agree bidding so far. Pass now. Game could be reasonable, but often no play or rather poor. Pard has not promised much, so I won't bury him.

Even when it's right to double, it doesn't work, since the ox may assume we have our bid. :angry:

My idea of relatively optimal bidding for this generic spot uses the following rules: 1. 3NT is to play. 2. Step 1 below three major is a random game try. 3. When 2. is true, step 2 (not 3M) is a non-serious try. When 2. is not true the next step 1 other than 3M or 3N is a non-serious try (eg 1♥-2♦-3♦-3♠). 4. Higher steps are "natural" slam tries promising Hxx or better and the equivalent of 16+. 5. Jumping to game shows a decent non-slammish minimum acceptance. Putting that together in the actual sequence: 3♦ = min but better than sign-off 3♥ = non-serious 3♠ = worst hand 3NT = natural 4♣+ = serious tries The hand is not possible for me, since I play a 2♠ opening showing 8-11 with six spades, so would have done that.

I did a quick search through my database (semi finals and finals world champs, us trials, spingold, and vanderbilt since 2000, Euros since 2004 one match each round) and somewhat strangely, this situation occurred only once. Richard Freeman perpetrated a double of Stayman on: ♠532 ♥54 ♦K8 ♣A98542 and got his head served up on a plate.

I hit "post" too quickly. Having said that, the hand is a lot more representative than the actual one - five great clubs and a hand comfortably worth 1♣ followed by 2NT.

♠K854 ♥T974 ♦JT2 ♣64 ♠AJ3 ........ ♠Q972 ♥K32 ........ ♥AQ86 ♦K75 ........ ♦A9864 ♣AJ97 ....... ♣- ♠T5 ♥J5 ♦Q3 ♣KQT8532 Whether South has his bid or not is not really the issue. As long as partner has his bid, we will be fine significantly more often than not. Give South KQJxxx (he has his bid, tight?) and partner AT9xx and we are also almost always OK. As mentioned above, there are those who redouble on AT9x, in which case we have to pull. My minimum is AJ9x, and then only with aces and kings on the side, so it's a super-easy pass. Besides, at matchpoints, the name of the game is taking advantage of the opponent's indiscretions, and we sometimes have to risk a bottom to do so.

I'm losing the will to live here. Declarer's last four cards are KJ♥ and Kx♦. I overruff with the nine and play ace and another. I presume I'm wrong of course. :blink:

This is matchpoints, so it's just a matter of percentages. It doesn't matter if partner has only four clubs, since they will be good ones. Give partner: ♠??x ♥??x ♦??x ♣KJTx I would reckon on making 2♣ about 60% of the time. Make it: ♠??? ♥??? ♦??? ♣AKT8 And you can put the chances at about 80%, and frequently with an overtrick. At teams it would be different, since we can underwrite 3NT, so it would only be rational dally in 2♣ if we were almost certain to make and were expecting an overtrick.

Punish them!

I can never resist passing in this spot.

I might be being a bit thick, but declarer is just down now - I can play any card in my hand, but I shall draw trumps to finish it quickly. Disclaimer - I have been drinking heavily, so claiming seems best this point. The bells, the bells!

I play the ♦2 on the previous trick, fooling partner into discarding a diamond on the fourth spade. trick 8: ♦Q 9: spade ruff, partner pitching 10: diamond, ruffued and overruffed 11: heart, declarer misguessing I doubt this is the answer. (edit - sorry hadn't seen Gnasher said exactly the same)

Natural 2NT bidders are a minority, even in the land of Acol. You just have to respond 2♣ and work it all out later. Obviously it will turn out the pair does not even play Acol. :ph34r:

It's possibly worse than that - I am assuming that it was a weak NT pair, in which case: Kxx AQx Jxx Jxxx is a 2♣response, since pard passes 1NT with a minimum strong NT. Yes I know that hand bids 4NT now - just saying.

South was at fault. North cannot conceivably not have good diamonds - he made a slam try even though we put on the brakes with 3NT, so he's got, of all things, a good hand and good controls. When North bids 4♠ the message is that he just needs good trumps from us. I know I'll never convince the must-cue-bid-up-the-line brigade, but it is what it is. Look at it this way: we could have a lot more wasted in hearts, we have a sixth club and we have a good suit. Could it possibly be that is what partner was looking for? And how can partner not have the cards we need? From North's point of view, we are obviously off two bangers. eg: ♠Kxx ♥KJx ♦x ♣KJxxxx

It's simply the wrong question, so the thread is an exercise in futility. Bidding captaincy has nothing to do with whether one has the stronger or weaker hand.

Trick 2, ruff a heart Many variants now, but the key is just to extract both of West's trumps, before executing partial reversal and suicide squeeze. But simplest: Tricks three and four: ace and another trump 5: ruff a heart 6: diamond 7: heart ruff 8: diamond 9: draw trump 10: lead your heart loser - East raises the white flag

West pitches instead of ruffing.

Nice hand - I thought it would end up as a Ottlikesque knockout squeeze, but you stumble into a standard dummy reversal and suicide squeeze.

Bid 4♥ over 3NT - Zooming Rollover Gerber for queens. :P

Information leakage in this thread.