EricK

I will bid a quantitive 4NT. 2♣ might gain (if we find a ♥ fit, and trumps break well, and 4th hand doesn't get in a lead directing double of 2♣), but it might lose, and it will certainly give information to the opponents about opener's distribution. Eric

No Glen, what I am arguing is that because this is the most common range it is also the optimal range. You get in and out of the auction very quickly. Some anecdotal evidence: (1D) P (2S) ? xx AKJxx Axx KJx 1D = 8-12 with 4+S, 2S = 5-12 with 4+S The opponents hold between 13 and 24 HCP with 8+S. How safe is it for you to enter this auction? But why 8-12 and not 7-12 or 8-13 or 7-13 etc etc. These are more common than 8-12! Eric

I have seen 11-13 & 5 card majors in 1&2 along with 14-16 and 4 card majors in 3&4. The rationale of switching to 4 card majors is that you have lost the pre-emptive effect of 1NT but you get it back by the pre-emptive effect of 1M. Eric

This makes no sense to me. You choose to bid the same thing in two different ways, thereby getting rid both of WJS and SJS. Petko If you play WJS this way then bidding 1M and then rebidding 2M now shows the invitational strength hand. Eric

It seems that there are two style for WJS 1) purely pre-emptive, probably fewer HCP than a minimum 1 level response. 2) the kind of hand which would bid 1M but then try to sign off in 2M unless opener showed significant extras. I don't like choice 1, and would much rather play SJS. There just doesn't seem to be enough room to describe all your other hand types without making "nothing" bids (i.e. generalised forcing bids which don't tell partner anything useful about your hand). Choice 2 is OK though. Probably just as useful as SJS and just as common. Eric

Playing "light" openings (as I understand the phrase) I would have opened the West hand. Playing any sort of openings I don't think I would have opened 1♦ with the East hand. I prefer 1♣, 1♠ or even 1♥! I think the less pre-emptive a light 3rd seat opening is, the more lead directing it should be. In fact, on the assumption that partner was playing light openings, I probably wouldn't open the East hand at all. I have some sympathy for the 4♠ jump, but assuming you have seen this partner's 3rd seat openings before it does look like an overbid. I suspect you made it because deep down you were worried that you underbid on the previous round. Eric

Can some European player please explain the logic behind this. I see it over and over again and I don't understand. I think the idea is that with hands which would normally reply 1♥ and rebid 2♥ you bid 2♥ straightaway. Then with hands which are stronger but not GF you actually do bid 1♥ and rebid 2♥. And with GF hands you bid 1♥ and then 3♥. Eric

Is 6♦ a bad contract? Certainly not the worst slam I've ever got to! Not sure I would get to it though. 1♦ 1♥ 2♣ 2♠ 2NT 3♥ 3NT(or 4♥) P looks normal. But the totally natural Stone Age Acol auction: 1♦ 2♥ 3♣ 3NT 4NT 6♦ looks kinda believable. Eric

I wouldn't open 1NT but I wouldn't mind if partner did (especially if he is a better declarer than I). If playing SJS, I would definitely do it on this hand. Being able to inform partner that game is certain, slam is possible if he has the right minimum, and that the ♦K is a golden card all at the level of 2♦. What a bargain! After 1♣ 1♦ I would rebid 2♣ although If playing Walsh I have a sneaking sympathy for 1♠ much as I hate bidding 3 card suits if I can avoid it. I think if you are not prepared to rebid 2♣ on a hand like this then you should have opened 1NT. I think you have got to make a try over 3NT. The obvious bid being 4♦. But this shows why SJS actually save space in the long run. If the hand is a complete misfit, 4NT might just be too high, but if partner has a good fit for you slam is on - it would have been nice to have already informed partner of that before my third bid. Eric

If the flair player could not articulate exactly what made him play like that then I would still be suspicious. Just saying "table presence" can not be enough. For one thing, if you do not know exactly what the clues were that lead you to your conclusion then it may be the case that you were picking up clues from your partner, which is unethical. Eric

Further to my previous post (about wanting to play this in NT rather than ♥). I did a quick simulation using Jack 3.0, and NT made as many tricks as ♥ on every occasion (about 20 or so deals) bar one where it made one extra trick. Eric

I think there could be a problem if we "fool" pard making him believe spades are trumps. In the full RKB described by Kantar, when spades are trumps, a later 6H bid by the 4NT bidder will be interpreted as an asking bid in hearts (can ask for 2nd or 3rd round control, according to the various sequences). Pard will bid the GRAND slam in SPADES if he has the control we are asking, and would not very happy to play a GRAND in a likely 4-2 fit. So, if pard plays the full RKCB version, the only chance to correct the slam will be in NT. That's true. Although I would be planning to play this in NT anyway. If ♥ run I almost certainly have the same number of tricks in ♥ and NT, but if eg one opponent has ♥JTxx and I am missing the ♦A then I might still survive in NT (eg partner has right 5-3-1-4 hand). Eric

I expect 1♦ 1♠ 2♠ pass will be fairly common. But I know of some who might perpetrate 1♦ 1NT pass. BTW whatever happened to the concept of biddable suits?! Eric

I open 1♦. I am unlikley to get to describe this hand at a reasonable level if I open 2♣. I prefer 1♦ to 1♠ for 3 reasons: 1. My diamonds are longer and stronger 2. 1♦ is less likely to be passed out than 1♠ 3. Over the most likely response of 1♥ I can show my enormous playing strength and still be at the 2 level. If the bidding starts 1♦ (1♥) P (P) then I will reopen with a jump to 2♠ Eric

It is clear after partner's double that you are in the slam zone. If you don't want to jump to slam immediately or after 3♦ 3♠, then what actually is wrong with 4NT RKC? It doesn't matter that you don't have a ♠ fit because you are in control of the auction, so you are allowed to fool partner in that respect. Eric

I doubt anybody was deliberately trying to decieve anybody else. It looks like a mis-spelling of the word "or" combined with an accidental omisssion of the space after "6m". Since the explanation as it stands is meaningless ("6more" doesn't mean anything in English or in bridge) E/W should really ask for clarification. Eric

In an ideal world, I think case 2 is preferable, but I doubt any organisation would ever implement it fully. I.e. publish a complete system which everyone needs to learn, and any bid which doesn't conform needs an alert. No troubles playing with a pick-up partner. No confusion as to what does or doesn't require an alert. No worries about how to deal with unusual methods by the opps - It's all in the published system. Eric

You've got to pass. 3♠ might be making with overtricks. Partner has told me what he has got. I hope he doesn't feel that he has to tell me again. Give overcaller ♠KJT9xx ♥A ♦x ♣AQxxx and partner ♠AQ ♥KQxx ♦KQJx ♣KJx and see how many tricks are made in ♠! Eric

Just about strong enough for 2♦. 3♦ is crazy at this vulnerability IMO. But pass is plausible as there is a good chance you will be on lead and unless partner can show some independent sign of life there is little chance of your actually buying the contract, and revealing your strength might drop a trick in defense. Eric

It is close between 2♠ and pass. If I have a close decision and 3 small in their suit then I usually go for the cautious route. So Pass for me. I do expect partner to balance aggressively though (as is the style in England). Eric

Are you referring to your hand or your partner?

Assuming 2♠ is FSGF, I bid 3NT to show that I am minimum with ♠ doubly stopped and no extra length anywhere. 2NT would show either extras or doubt as to strain. I would have rebid 1NT instead of 1♥. I would have preferred to have been able to open 1NT instead of 1♣. Eric

I play 3♦ as weak. You can cue-bid with a strong hand. Eric

On Roland's hand, the easiest way to find the ♠K (which is an important card for a grand slam) is to start with 2♠. Eric

What rule is that??? :rolleyes: Stephen Burgess, a truly great player, and drinker, (so he will appeal to you Frederick), argued that 7-4 shapes should be opened at the game level. But that could mean you open this 3NT. Eric