monikrazy

I prefer 1♠ to double. As played, a strong game-force like 4♣> 4♠.

i've got 2n > 3d > 3c, there's more value in showing diamond length than club holdings, and declaring nt now may help right-side the contract

The blame has to be on North, first for the initial decision to pass instead of a more descriptive bid (whether double, 3h or 4h) and then shutting out partner on 5th level when double, pass, or pulling partner's double could all be better options (depending on method).

The 2♥ seems like a real stretch. The 3 level could be way too high. Going with a low 1NT with a weakish 11 seems much better. The double of 3C also seems dubious. Even if its ok on values it suggests more defense in clubs and doesn't show the extra length in spades. Pass or 3S could both be ok here, partner can keep the auction going, and there is a heart tolerance to fall back on,

any club below the T

100% S. If double isn't flexible, has to bid game.

I was trying to point out that many pairs would explicitly not bid 4♦ with a 6-4 shape. And by extension, that it's still unclear whether the 4♥ bid is favored.

I was thinking along the lines of a more mundane 4♣ from said hand.

And for the partnerships that don't splinter with premium 6-4 hands? Is a 4♥ bid still obvious?

Is 4♥ from S clear? We have an ok hand, but I'm not sure we should be encouraging slam. Once S cooperate with a slam try, the 6S bid seems fine (i'm not sure how much value there is searching for a grand here opposite a passed hand, and there is something to be said for fast arrival) . Also not bothered by splintering with an ace when the opener is this strong.

Bidding 3N now. Too good for a 3H preempt.

as bid agree that the most logical interpretation of the auction is to treat the 5H bid as a cue bid for spades i guess that leaves a grand slam force 5n as our best option since cue-bidding one of the minors when we have both won't let the partnership know whether we have all the keycards looking at partner's hand it seems clear that 3s was intended as natural, which is a mistake given his amazing heart suit and the auction, after you show 9+ minors partnership is never going to play in spades

I prefer 1♠ overcall to michaels. Bidding michaels with less than full opening values Red vs. White is too unwieldy and dangerous for me. With the S hand, 4H seems a little optimistic even opposite a full partner. Double seems like the best of some bad choices.

2N is played as a relay to 3C, and normally denies game-forcing values with responder. If responder has a good 5+ points, there is no difficulty at all discovering the fit. The scenario where partnership may not discover the fit is when responder has 5 hearts and signs off in a longer minor. Given sufficient extras, opener may also choose to show his 3-card support even after partner tries to sign-off in a minor As to whether a 16-count should bid 2S with 4+ spades and exactly 3 hearts, it depends on overall hand strength. For me, something like the hand below would be perfectly sufficient for that bid. AKTx A9x x KQxxx make it a little worse KQxx Axx x AKxxx and I now prefer a 1S bid I also have the option of raising to 2H with 3 cards and a good 12-15 points. Meckwell game tries compliment this approach nicely.

If you dislike playing 1S as NF you might want to consider looking into the Ingberman convention after reverses. This can handle light reverses by opener very efficiently and allow partnership to sign off at the 3 level when the responder is weak or there is a misfit. With a gadget like this, you will probably not be nearly as worried about responder passing. 1S. The real problem comes when partner continues bidding with 2H. Pass, 2N and 3C all viable contingent on scoring and vulnerability.