monikrazy

My first inclination here is to lead the 10♠ but I'm not sure how much better or worse it is than a heart. Maybe some advanced/expert posters could chime in on my thoughts below? Given the bidding, I don't expect declarer to have more than 7 spades. Does leading the 10♠ help the defenders combat a squeeze more effectively? Additionally, should I be more worried about a squeeze or helping declarer finesse partner for a spade honor given my hand? I suspect declarer will probably be able to guess the spade distribution pretty well once he starts running hearts and (judging from my hand) maybe clubs.

I'm going to trust my partner's judgment and pass. Bidding higher doesn't seem worth the risk.

DBL. Bidding 1NT with only 1 spade stop and no hearts values seems unnecessarily dangerous, especially if partner wants to play 3NT. We can still find our way back into a NT contract after we double.

Yes. Yes. Agree w/ Winston that the rule of 15 doesn't really help us evaluate Hero's hand in this spot.. The rule of 15 mostly aims to remind us that if we are competing for a part score strength in the majors is more valuable. While there still is a risk opponents find a part-score in spades after we open the bidding Hero's hand is a bit too strong for us pass out with confidence of scoring well. The rule of 15 generally assumes the points outside of the hand are evenly divided, so we should expect our partner to have 9.3333 points on average. Hero's partner showing up with xxxx, x, Kxxxx, Kxx is consistent with the bidding and strongly suggests both opponents were only slightly short of an opening bid.

3♠ seems right. Not unreasonable to evaluate our hand as 16 points with 3 aces, a 10 and a singleton. I don't want to miss a vulnerable game.

You seem to have two seperate issues with my posts. The first is the use of a jump to 4♣ by responder after opener bids a trump suit after stayman or a transfer. Roman Key Card Gerber is is a common treatment. Maybe using 4C as a splinter is more popular right now, but this seems like an excellent auction for the use of 4♣ as RKCG. Your concern over the shape of our hand (perhaps you would prefer a rebid by responder of 5NT to show 5 hearts and a balanced hand?) seems somewhat misplaced, especially since RKC gerber allows us to query keycards early in the auction (mitigating some of the perceived risks). Responder clearly dictates that game will be played in hearts or NT, and promises exactly 5 hearts. His balanced shape should also be apparent to opener since he has methods of showing other 4 card suits in addition to hearts (ex. stayman followed by Smolen, 3♣ or 3♦ after tranfe) . Were responder to insist on hearts (promising at least 6) he could bid texas, followed by 4NT Roman Key Card Blackwood. *Playing this method (essentially the Max Hardy method): Responder can bid 3S after 2H to show shortness in an undisclosed suit. Your second issue is with how the auction would be likely to proceed after the queen-ask of 4♠, and whether responder might query the queen without the other keycards. I find these concerns here much more pertinent, and specifically see how the opener's jump to grand slam in my example auction could easily be viewed as unrealistic. I agree that opener bidding directly to grand slam on this sequence would be a rarity. I think I have sucessfully established my larger point that RKCG is a structurally sound slam-seeking for OP's hand though. If responder might query queens without all the other keycards (and without knowing that opener has more than 2 hearts), then 4NT would deny the queen and 5♣ would show the queen. Bids above 4NT would show the trump queen and other information, subject to partner agreement. I can post another auction if someone wants to provide me both hands (as opposed to only the responder)

Agree. I would double and if partner bids 3♣ we should always correct to diamonds.

The bidding seems normal, 3NT is a clear sign-off. Without the King of spades prefer a pass. We can get back into the auction easily enough & frequently describe our shape better than if we opened ourselves (ex. P-P-P-1 ♠-2♠ (michaels))

5♥ seems like our only option (assuming we don't have any method to transfer). @aguahombre 4N - either minor - 5♥ seems like a rather odd sequence to invite slam With a shape like xx -xxxx - xxx - xxxx I would expect 5♥ after 5♦ to be a preference bid. I use 4N to show a willingness to play in 2 suits.

No - you are not reading the auction correctly. After the responder asks for the queen (4[spades)) opener instigates the next step. Responder can not ask for the queen without all aces and the king of trumps being accounted for. It is true that the opener would frequently stop in small slam (and/or give responder a chance to upgrade to grand) but without partner's hand from OP I took some creative license.

I believe 4♣ after the transfer would typically be RKC gerber (hearts ). This is probably the auction you are looking for. Opener gets to choose the final strain since this method should promise exactly 5 hearts; but you will be able to determine the correct level. Using RKC gerber I believe this is one sequence you could use to bid the grand slam 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥ - 4♣ - 4♥ - 4♠ - 5♣ - 5♥ - 7♥ or 7NT Explanations: 2♦ transfer 4♣ RKC Gerber 4♥ 1 or 4 keycards 4♠ Queen-asks, all other 5 keycards are accounted for 5♣ All 6 keycards held, inquires Kings 5♥ 1 King *7NT - With only 2 Hearts Opener would bid NT instead of ♥ ** The 5♥ and 5♣ bids are redundant. Opener knows responder has the King♥ all ready. I included it in the hope other posters may find the asking-sequence instructional.

Agree that 3c shows 4 of an unspecified major, 5 or more clubs and game-forcing values.Would not alert.

edit: deleted

1S seems vastly superior to double, assuming we are using the doubles for takeouts, and appears to be the best bid available overall. Like other posters have said, misrepresenting out diamond length is a major problem (and more so without any diamond honors). 1♥ - DBL - 3♥ (weak) 1♥ - DBL - 4♥ (weak) In auctions like the above partner may put us in ♦, counting on 3 or 4 card support and we can go down for major penalty. Compare that to the downside of our partner playing us for an extra spade; partner can hardly be too upset seeing our full values for over-call. Moreover, we will frequently have space to slow down if partner has game-seeking values.

wouldn't declarer be twice as likely to have a stiff A or K? and what if partner has a stiff honor

10♣ - '2nd highest from a suit headed by an internal sequence'

Double may be light but doesn't bother me as long as partner understands we will sometimes choose to compete light. 2H call seems very problematic. 3D, 4D, or even a responsive double all seem reasonable. W correcting to hearts also makes sense from the bidding imo. Edit: RSClyde I missed your question about responsive doubles in your post. I use responsive doubles and agree that they can be extremely useful in this type of auction.

Hi everyone. I am looking for intermediate-to-advanced players seeking to improve their game and establish consistency at higher level of competition. (Playing 2/1 game force) I believe cultivating regular partnerships is the best way to accomplish that. About me: Male in his mid-20s, working out of the general NY area (EST). Also open to live partnerships in comparable age groups. Style of play: I have tried to model my convention card in the Max Hardy Style (as presented in his book, Two Over One Game Force Revised-Expanded). If you are prepared to see way too much information you can view the text from my BBO profile below: Feel free to contact me through any of the following: Message me on the forum, Message me directly on BBO, or post relevant questions/and interest directly in this thread. Thanks!

I agree with 2♦ rebid by opener. Even though this does not always promise 6, its very important responder knows that we did not open a 3 or 4 card suit. Responder can then set trump with 3d (forcing), we can cue our spade control, and responder should have no trouble getting us to slam from there . NT should be safest as we have risk of ruff in both non-trump minor. As to the problem of how can responder check whether opener has 5 or 6 diamonds (and thus how large of a danger the outstanding Q presents) - what would a jump to 5c or 6c by responder after 3d promise? Could either of those bids help find the grand.

I think without agreement, 3♥ would generally be considering preemptive. And white vs. red it can make finding the right contract harder for opponents. As played, correction to 2H after 2D is unlikely to cost, and may score better than diamonds.

Seems like a pass. If partner is extremely short clubs like you suspect, he can continue the auction as he seems fit. We have no stoppers in other suits, which is what feature-asking looks for. If we pass and partner doubles, 3♥ is probably safest. It depends on partners minimum points for 2NT bid. White vs. red I prefer 3H preempt. Would not always preempt though.

Agree w/ other posters who prefer 1♠ opening. The biggest problem stretching to 2♣ for me is that constricting the bidding space makes it hard to judge whether 3NT is the best spot (regardless of your response system). 1♠ open and a reverse should allow us both plenty of space to decide the right contract and describe our shape. I would be more worried about bidding too high and going down than 1♠ being passed out. Edit: While technically not a reverse (we can have a 'high reverse') I think my meaning that we have plenty of bids to express our extra values was clear.

2C is game-forcing except stops in 4 of a minor are permissible with bad fits.

[hv=pc=n&w=sakqt65h43dqck642&e=sha9djt732caqjt95&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=1sp2cp3cp5cppp]266|200[/hv] What is the best bid (and its meaning) for West to make following East's 2C bid? I am playing 2/1, 2C promising 11+ and 4+ clubs. It seems like 2♠, 3♣, 3♦(splinter), 4♣(what meaning does this typically suggest?) and maybe even 4♦(also a splinter?) are all conceivable options. Perhaps there are some other good options I didn't think of. :o Thanks ! B-) Edit: My usage of 'jump reverse' was incorrect, as two posters have mentioned all ready. I am no longer confident anyone recommends the use of 3D as a natural jump shift showing additional values and a 5/4 shape or better after a forcing response, and have edited small parts of the post to reflect this change and avoid unnecessary confusion. My misunderstanding stemmed from a misreading of Max Hardy's (in-depth) "Two over One Game Force".

If we lead a diamond, is there any argument for leading the 8 instead of the 10? I'm curious to how much value experts might expect from the deceptive lead.