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.

1st auction is game-forcing, the second one is not.

After a 1C open: 1. At imps, 3D. At MP, maybe 2N. 2. 3N. After a major open 1. 2N 2. 3C A 2N redid by Hardy after a forcing NT shows 9-12 with other suits well-stopped so I think its a very reasonable description of our 10-count.

7N. Going to assume partner is bidding correctly and not giving us a torture bid for no good reason. Partner seems heavily favored to have AKxxxx(x)(x) type hands With a hand like KQTxxx(x) he had 3 chances to bid 4S. Even if we are slightly optimistic on our evaluation, a grand still shouldn't require more than a finesse. Also somewhat important to our decision is what 3N - >5N would mean. If we have a clear understanding that that bid is forcing to slam and invite to grand only then do I consider not bidding directly to the 7 level.

4S tells partner you have minimal values and/or are not interested in slam. All other bids are more constructive. Passing for instance, normally allows partner to redouble to show 1st round control, and may also allow him to show 2nd-round control in diamonds.

Imps or MP? I prefer 3N to 4SF with S's hand. However, I do think he could improve the auctionthrough some combination of the two actions: 1. Establish a gameforce with his first bid by bidding 2m. 2. Pulling 4H to 5C (at matchpoints this is a harder call)

At least 80% West Even with the understanding that partnership should open 5CM, this hand can be evaluated as slightly better than 17 points and too good for a 1N open (especially given the vul) West has the values for a negative double, and will be in a much better position to judge how the contract should continue after partner's next bid. East has other better choices tha jumping to game but its not as egregious an error.

non-forcing i can't think of many instances where this is correct, we might as well try to play in 3n first

Double. I am not enamored with this bid, mostly due to the poor quality of my spade suit, but we have no better alternatives.

I would bid 4♠ and consider it relatively standard.

Pass 100%.