MickyB

Not convinced by some of that - I'm raising either a weak 2♠ or a 2♠ rebid, after all someone has some hearts! I think our auction was the rather inelegant 1♠:2♣ 2♠:3♦ 3NT:P

1♠:2♥ 4♥ 2♥ in theory shows a 10 count opposite our light (rule of 19) openings. Not sure what call I'd have come up with on that hand.

1♦:1♥ 1N:2♣ 3N:P The 1NT rebid shows the minors, clubs at least as long as diamonds; 2♣ was preference. My pard forgot to open a Dutch 2♥, otherwise we would repeat Cascade's auction.

Yeah, a knockout would be awesome.

Woah. I'm always passing on the south hand if you double 4♦. I bid 5♦, pard bid 6♠. Not sure whether I'd have gone for 6 on his hand.

Our style is to accept on any excuse - 2NT is a silly place to play a contract! My partner accepted, and I probably would have done as well. Having said that, I've just Binkied these two hands, and the results surprised me; responders is above average for a 12 count, and openers is closer to 11 points than 12. Ok, you win :D

Our auction was a fair bit longer! Basically, it consisted of a 11-13 1NT rebid and a invitational 2NT, which was accepted.

Good point. It wasn't an option for us though - 1♣ is fairly frequently bid on 2 cards, so 1♣:2♣ is forcing and 1♣:3♣ shows 6 cards, so 1♣:1NT is a non-forcing "raise" of clubs (4+ unless 3343)

1♦:1♠ 2♠:4♠ My pard picked a 2♠ raise, which is less of an underbid than it might seem because 1♦ promised an unbalanced hand. Still, he could have had a weakish 31(45), so I think 3♠ would be better, which will nearly always have five diamonds. I reckon the best call, if available, is a 3♥ invitational-plus splinter, but many play it as GF which is a little rich for me.

This was fairly easy playing transfer walsh - 1♣:1♠ 2♣: P 1♣ could be short, 1♠ showed 5+♦, and 2♣ was rather uncomfortable. After that double would have been penalties, but neither of us had anything more to say. Might be interesting to compare the auctions the participants had with how they'd have coped with 1♣-(P)-1♦-(2♦).

No - takeout of spades should have heart length and spade shortage. 4-1-4-4 would bid 2♠.

I agree that double as balanced is best in direct seat. Not sure whether it is best to keep it like this in 4th seat, or revert to takeout. Certainly seems best to revert to takeout by a passed hand. Richard suggested that the double should include hands with ♠ shortage. How would you then play 2♥-X-2♠-X? Should 2nd seat pull with spade shortage? I'm tempted to sit and wait with ♠ shortage, but that could backfire. 2♠ as takeout of hearts makes sense...should it be forcing or NF? If NF, then I guess big hands either have to bid an artificial 2NT or cuebid. If it is forcing, 2NT and the cuebid can probably both be used as 2 suiters.

I share your scepticism for 4 card overcalls. If partner makes a preemptive raise on his 4 card support and a singleton club you better make it, because the opponents won't have anything on. I've got more time for frequent 4 card overcalls, then partner knows not to preempt so aggressively opposite. Something like Overcall Structure, maybe?

I'd have said white vs white was the best time - you are still gaining a couple of imps if one contract makes and the other is one off. Are you concerned that they may have hands just shy of looking for game NV, that would have bid more strongly vulnerable?

A player can't hesitate to limit the options of his ethical partner. Of course thinking is ok. That isn't what was said. I agree, only one of these two actions can be suggested by the UI - In this case, it is pulling. Passing in this situation when you would have pulled had partner not hesitated is not an infraction. More than that - he should not make a call that is suggested by the UI over other logical alternatives. It is clear to me here that the break in tempo suggests pulling. If pass would have been forcing, then partner was probably considering a forcing pass which you would then pull. If pass would have been non-forcing, pard was probably considering either a pass or a 5♠ bid, either of which suggests competing to 5♠. The responses to this thread indicate that pass is certainly a logical alternative, so it is an infraction to pull the double. If partner has hesitated with a clearcut double, he has committed an infraction. Committing another one yourself doesn't help.

Not really - I typed "bridge laws" into google and got this.

Strange, I misread the diamonds bit too. You are talking about anticipating the other room, but you haven't given us any of the conditions of the match, so we don't know whether we should be trying to reach the same contract or a different one! Are we currently ahead or behind? Are we a fair bit stronger than the other team? Either way, I think 3NT sounds right.

If pard has hesitated on a clearcut double, then the opponents could argue that, yes. Deliberately hesitating to get partner to pass is cheating, so I don't expect partner to have that hand. There is a possibility partner was considering a slam-try; But most of the time he will have a hand unsure whether to double or compete to 5♠. The UI clearly suggests pulling IMO, and bidding 5♠ will get our side a bad result, either at the table or from the director.

I disagree Owen - it isn't unethical to pass for fear of a ruling against you.

Veering off slightly here...if these hands transfer then bid 3♣, are you ever happy to go past 3NT with 2♠4♣? If not, are you able to show support below 3NT? For me, 3♣ would be either 5-5 shape or slam interest, so on the original hand I'm on a guess. I'd bid 4♠, but I'm not at all confident that this is right - particularly after reading the other replies ;)

Isn't that what redouble is for?

I agree, Flame. Obviously it depends on the system, but when I've played unlimited openings I've responded on all 4 point hands, passing some three counts. Always fun to see what opps will protect on now :rolleyes:

If I bid assuming partner has misbid, I do so with the intention to get rid of this agreement as soon as we've played this hand. Otherwise, who is to say that he won't ignore the agreement next time, hoping that you'll either forget yourself or assume that he has?

Yup, I decided that after posting! In practice I'd always have corrected in case partner was 4-4.

Caren, pard should pass after 1N:2C, 2D:2H with equal length in the majors. It is debatable whether he should correct with 3S2H. The advantage to just transferring is that it gives them less info about the hand - this should make the defence slightly harder and they might balance into spades.