EricK

I bid 2♠. As others have said, there is too much of the strength in the ♠ suit and not enough strength or shape outside. A follow up question: What would it mean if you raise to 2♠, redouble after a balancing double, and then pull to 3♠?

The one who doubled is to blame for the bad result. They would probably have got to 4♠ even without the 4♥ bid. If opener had had a genuine 4♥ bid, he might have had even less defense than he actually had (eg an extra ♥ instead of ♦Q). What 4 tricks does the doubler think they are going to make? To put it another way. The 4♥ bid was bad. But the reason it was bad is that it doesn't have quite enough offense vulnerable at IMPS. If it is doubled it could cost quite a bit more than the value of the other side's vulnerable game. But the bad result which occurred was of a totally different sort. Hence the bad 4♥ bid was not to blame for the bad result.

OK. Change the response to 2♠ to 2NT minimum 3♣ maximum 4♥ (responder bids next step to confirm fit) 3♦ maximum 4♠ (responder bids next step to confirm fit) 3♥ maximum 5♥ 3♠ maximum 5♠ 3NT maximum no major After the 2NT response, 3♣ is Puppet Stayman This has a problem i tried to avoid, you will give information about opener's hand when respoder just want to invite NT. True. But hands which just want to invite 3NT are very rare. Especially if responder is not interested in whether opener has a 5 card major. It would have to be something like a 2245 hand in a very restricted HCP range.

OK. Change the response to 2♠ to 2NT minimum 3♣ maximum 4♥ (responder bids next step to confirm fit) 3♦ maximum 4♠ (responder bids next step to confirm fit) 3♥ maximum 5♥ 3♠ maximum 5♠ 3NT maximum no major After the 2NT response, 3♣ is Puppet Stayman

Seriously though, 3♠ must show some sort of fit. It would either be a splinter or a fit jump depending on agreements.

The trouble with 2♠ is we might miss a game. One trouble with 3♠ is that partner might bid a game which isn't there. The other trouble with 3♠ is that RHO may be sitting with a fair misfitting hand - I wouldn't like to be -300 on a part score hand. It's MP so I'll try to go plus. 2♠ for me, but if partner shows any sign of life, we'll get to game.

Here's something I just made up: 2♠ as invite in NT or Puppet Stayman Opener rebids 2NT with minimum, 3N with maximum and no 5 card suit; 3X with a 5 card suit and a maximum. After 2NT response, responder passes with the invite or bids 3♣ with Puppet Stayman hand (there is probably a good use for other 3 level bids by responder as well).

Does it mean "I only have 12 cards"?

Whether South has an opening bid or not is a red herring to the extent that if you make the South hand ♠xx ♥Q ♦KQJx ♣AQJTxx the auction would likely have been identical. North needs a way to show a strong hand with excellent ♠ and ♣ support. I am not a fan of WJS in general. I am even less of a fan of them in competition. But if you choose to play them you surely must have discussed what you are going to do with a hand which has the equivalent of a SJS. I imagine this would involve a cue-bid of ♥ on either the first or second round. So I think I give the blame to North if they had a method for showing a SJS but he failed to use it, or to the partnership if they agree WJS without discussing the obvious ramifications.

Maybe it marks me as a hand hog or maybe it marks me as a bad bidder, but I would have responded 3NT on the first round. On the auction you had, I suppose that 5♣ will show no major suit control, but because the 3♣ bid showed extras, partner then will not know about my extras. Since partner is showing significant extras here (he has shown extras and then bid again over your 3NT). I suppose you could just punt 6♣ and hope for the best.

I wouldn't have opened. But whether or not you should open, I think you should pass 3NT. Partner knows you might have extra length in one or both majors but chose not to enquire about it via FSF. Maybe he has solid ♣ and the ♦K and hopes he can run 9 tricks in 3N. I think the fact that you felt you couldn't trust partner's judgement on this auction shows that deep down you felt that you shouldn't have opened the hand. "6-5 come alive" does allow you to play dead for one round!

How do you envisage the bidding going opposite your 2551 hand if the 5107 hand passes to begin with?

Part of the problem is that bidding errors are often more apparent than play errors. I imagine that the majority of hands are (technically) misdeclared and/or misdefended. It is just that these errors so often go unnoticed and unpunished (or are unpunishable as the cards lie).

If a random partner bid your hand the way you did, I would expect something like what you actually had.

One aspect of bidding is for you and your partner to reach the best possbile contract for your side. To best achieve that goal it pays to keep the bidding low to give yourselves as much space as possible. But you must remember that the opponents are trying to do exactly the same thing. Hence to really succeed it is also important to try to stop them achieving that goal. The best way to do that is to remove their bidding space You are right when you say that a pre-empt may pre-empt partner. But if you never pre-empt partner when it happens to be your hand, then you are simply making it too easy for the opponents when it happens to be their hand. The more likely it is to be their hand the more keen you should be to pre-empt. In first seat, if you have a weak hand then the chances are that it is their hand, so pre-empting may be a good idea. In second seat after dealer has passed it is now a bit more likely that it is your hand, so you should be a bit more cautious with your pre-empts. In third seat after two passes, it is now very likely to be opponents' hand so pre-empting has a lot to gain and little to lose. Pre-emptive overcalls can be treated in a similar manner. I will leave it to you to think through the pluses and minuses in each position.

Is this actually legal? Doesn't one have to play to win?

What do you guys think of the idea of swapping responder's support bids so that 3♠ shows ♣ support and 4♣ shows ♠?

In the commentaries I have seen, this is always referred to as "pinning the Ten".

Surely 2♥ is at least forward going on this auction at IMPS, whether or not you play WJS. This should allow us to at least get to our best fit and not get too high, while still keeping game in the picture if partner turns up with something in ♥ (or ♠).

Playing a simple system it might go: 2♣ 2NT 4♦ 4♠ 4NT 5♥ 7NT Where opener has showed a very strong hand with a solid ♦ suit, and responder has shown a balanced hand with 2 Aces.

The main reason (there are other smaller ones I won't get into) is that you force the opponents to make an immediate decision over a natural 4♣/♦ bid, but give them two rounds to make slower decisions over a 3NT opening bid. 4m is one of the most effective pre-empts in practice. It would be a shame not to be able to use it. The point is that unless LHO has equal length in both majors he often has to guess at the correct strain, or double and hope partner guesses the best strain correctly. Even if 3NT as Namyats is not allowed, I don't think it is worth giving up 4 level minor pre-empts (especially when non-vul) to play two strengths of 4 level major pre-empts.

You should open them if they are at or above the minimum that partner will expect. So perhaps you are asking "should a partnership agree to open this sort of hand?". There are two main styles: 1. Bid as soon as you can whenever you have the chance, and hope that any loss in accuracy when it is your hand is counterbalanced by the difficulties presented to the opponents when it is their hand. 2. Bid more cautiously on the first round hoping for things like: a. If it is your hand you will be able to show your strength/distribution after your initial pass without overexciting partner. b. If it is their hand you will not given them any clues how to play it c. If it is a competitive hand, partner will be better able to make a bid on or double decision if he knows your opening bid has some "bite". But risking that: d. If it is their hand you might give a free run to find their best contract e. It might be your hand and neither you or your partner can scrape up a bid. If you have a regular partner, then perhaps what you should do is try both styles and see which one you prefer. But make sure that if you have agreed a style then you stick with it!

Although you are not playing any fancy conventions, do you have any agreements as to opener's rebids after 1♦ 2♣ (where 2♣ is not GF)?

I imagine East's thought processes were along these lines: Partner has a good(ish) hand He probably doesn't have ♥ support North's Pass (rather than bidding ♣) probably means that partner has short ♦ We are certainly in the game zone but very probably in the slam zone If we have a fit it is likely to be in ♠ I haven't got a clue how to investigate this properly.

A good case can be made for passing the double with the North hand. After all, partner may not have the perfect 4441 distribution. In particular, he may not have 4♠