PhilKing

No - pass is right. If partner has as much as: ♠xx ♥xxx ♦xx ♣xxxxxx He should appreciate that 4♥ could well be on and so should balance with a double, preferably in a voice of thunder. B-)

Oh my! I blush for those that do not see how the heart finesse can gain. The chances of the heart finesse depend on LHO. Good players tend to lead aggressively against a 4M opener, but that should not really apply when it is opened third in hand. As against that, with Kx KJT9 xxx Kxxx, the lead is still reasonable.

10 for the best bid, other bids are scored in relation to how well they will score on average compared to the best bid. So if you positive expectation was about 600 for bidding 4H (since you will sometimes reach slam) and about 420 for just jumping to slam, you would about 7 out of 10 for 6♥.

Unless using the Nigel scoring method, 4♥=10 everything else = 0.

How about this one .... ♠AT9xxxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣- First in hand at game all. Shocking, isn't it? But it was opened at two out of four tables in the USBC semis last night, and it gained a game swing once and broke even the other time.

For those nervous of putting this hand down in a doubled contract, our trick target is 6, since -100 rates to be a good result. Since we can achieve that opposite the monster that is: ♠xxx ♥xx ♦Axxx ♣Txxx Then its difficult for me to believe it is that wild a gamble to pass. And if the opponents remove the double, we have lost nothing - it's not as if we are going to buy the hand in 2♥.

Anyone can apply - but the doctors should probably not bother. :ph34r:

1NT all night. B-)

Partner can easily have 4 moderate spades here in my experience.

Which club did declarer play at trick one? If it was the six, partner has played his lowest club .... If pard has x AKxx Qxxx QJT9 it seems like he should help us out here. Natural signals generally take precedence over SP at trick one, so he should play the queen just to say clubs are under control. That will stop me playing a disastrous diamond. If he has x AKxx QJT9x JT9, he can play the jack, telling me clubs are running and encouraging the cash out. And if pard has x Axxx Kxxxx QJ9, where we need to switch to a diamond, then yes - he will play the nine by default. So that's what I will do. Edit this is wrong. Diamond switch is not necessary. I'm struggling for a rational hand (I can think of one where pard has a nine count) where a diamond switch is necessary to beat it, but it seems that's what partner wants. All three scenarios indicate that declarer was having a laugh in the bidding, but that's how some people roll these days. Scrap all of the aboe on the basis that OP was not correct. :ph34r:

Take these two auctions, which I think capture the pros and cons of the differing approaches in a nutshell. 2♣-4♦-x and 2♣-p-2♦-4♦-x In the first, the reason I think it is better to play double as values is not that this is better when responder does have values (it isn't) - it's better when responder has a bad hand. The point is, if responder's double merely shows, say, 0-4, that could be on any shape whatsoever. If you play pass as weak, you can then pass a reopening double when balanced, and bid with good shape, which is exactly how we are supposed to bid against high level preemption. In the second auction, I think it's right for double by opener to show a balanced hand that is suitable for partner bidding on (eg 4M on a 5-card suit). Pass should force responder to double unless he has very good shape, and is consistent with an unsuitable strong balanced hand. The advantage here is that the 2♣ opener gets two bites at the cherry with distributional hands, so he can bid a direct 4♥ with a one suiter, and a delayed 4♥ with a more flexible hand.

How disappointing - all I got was a load of pictures of some baseball player. :(

Pass looks like an excellent gamble.

My granny told me never to emphasise bad suits in slam auctions.

Sorry, I just don't give "random BBO experts" that much respect. Also, my "random BBO expert" partner will remove my double WAY more often than I would expect a regular partner to do, which is perfect for this hand.

I'm pretty sure I would double, but I am far from sure I am right.

It's probably time for another MEGAQUIZ.

Playing the agreements as specified, I double. But I strongly prefer that double from partner's side is for "penalties". In that case, he has to double with a balanced yarborough as well as with genuine penalty doubles - so pass shows a suitable hand for bidding on. On that basis I would punt 5NT - pick a slam. I think the pot odds for this choice are pretty good.

Having not opened 1NT, rebidding 2NT is better than 3♣. It's a slight stretch, but the hand has no trumps written all over it.

I just spotted a few more that were, er, borrowed from The Most Puzzling Situations in Bridge, by Reese.

It's not an agreement (yep, I know Gnasher said it is). I mean, it's not like any reasonable partnership would agree not to do it having weighed up the pros and cons - it's a known expert technique.

I'm a little confused, because in this thread http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/70747-invite-or-not-10-hcp-6-4/, you signed off with an obvious invitation because you apparently assumed, for no reason whatsoever, that partner had opened on "crap".

I've wrestled with this problem for a long time. I think Frances and Justin's agreements are both absolutely fine, and are not particularly better or worse than mine in isolation, but I think I mine is better as a meta-solution. Play double as forcing up to 2 of our "suit" and non-forcing if higher. Where pass is forcing, play double for penalties (but sticking to take-out is fine). The point is, say it goes 1♥-1NT-X-2C-?, if my pass is not forcing, I am not exactly going to be happy on a range of hands. And it hardly seems likely that a forcing pass will get us in trouble. Contrast this with the auction 1NT(weak)-X-2m-p, which quite a lot of partnerships play as forcing. This is absurd for a couple of big reasons. Firstly, we often don't have the balance, and secondly, they are frequently bidding a short suit and planning an escape. To counter both strategies a non-forcing pass is mandatory, imo. In the auction where they raise to 3♦, pass should definitely be non-forcing and double for take-out. Say opener is 4513, who knows what kind of result you can hit by doubling. But as long as you now what double means, you should be on firm ground.

To be fair, although you are completely wrong, a simulation would probably prove that you are right. :P

I'm in the double camp. This shows "transferable values" for me, and I expect partner to sit the double unless he has decent shape. Typically, he will pass with any 5332, 5431 or 5422, pull with 55 or 64, and use his judgement with 6 spades and, say a 6223 distribution. I would expect him to bid 4♠ at these colours unless his spades are very weak. So if, partner passes, I do not expect us to have missed slam that often unless partner has four clubs, and over any removal, I will drive to slam.