MickyB

How can 3S be preemptive? Opp dont have a fit and you own spade suit. Opps do have a fit, they just don't know where it is yet. If you pass they will find it. I agree that the case for making a preemptive bid here is less than in other cases, but if you make some 3♠ bids blocking and others invitational how are you going to agree with partner when each applies?

How their identities will affect your partnership understandings, yes; But in most cases I wouldn't expect it to do so. It might affect how you play, but I wouldn't expect partner to be in on the act.

What hand won't he know what to do with, and how will he be better placed after 1♠ from you?

I bet against that. Arend Tell me what your bid was Fluffy and I'll join in the betting! 6♣? 4♥? 3N? X?

As has been hinted at, the problem with long suit trials is that a lot of partnerships don't know what holding they use them on. Some use it on xxx or Axx, in which case you are looking for shortage opposite and QTx isn't terribly great; Some on KJxx in which case QTx is gold and a shortage isn't great. Some use it on both, which just sounds ridiculous to me! A little while back I designed a set of game-tries that tried to keep the info from opps if possible, particularly about declarer's hand. After all, no point in going down one in 4S when without the game-try opps would have let through two overtricks in 2S, or just let through 4S if it had been bid without giving away the info! After 1S:2S, it was something like this... 2N = long suit GT in any suit, looking for honours opposite not shortage. Typical holdings KJxx, QJxx, KQxx. Now 3S rejects any GT, 4S accepts any GT, 3D and 3H reject GTs in the suit below but accept GTs in the other two suits, 3C asks which GT opener has (either will be a hand that only wants to accept one GT, or a hand that would accept a GT in either minor) 3C = 5332 interested in 3NT or singleton club. 3D accepts the former, may wish to play in 3N (rightsided) opposite 5332 and 4S opposite club shortage. 3H accepts the latter only. 3S declines both, 3N accepts both and wants to hog the contract opposite the 5332! 3D = singleton diamond or blocking reraise. 3H shows an acceptance of the GT, 3S a rejection 3H = singleton 3S = General invitation Which game-tries go through which bids could probably be improved upon, I haven't thought it through too carefully... but I think the general structure is great.

Even if it isn't the right action playing with a pick-up on BBO, I think you need to trust partner more than this in a bidding poll! Most 3622 hands are going to pull to 1S if you redouble, if you bid 1S then you are potentially leaving yourself in a 4-1 fit and you won't be able to play 1H XX when it is right.

I went for 4♣, but now not so sure...pard bid over 2♥ when I could have been 1435, maybe 5♣ as a two-way shot is best. I don't expect it to give them much of a guess though - it is unlikely to be right for them to compete to 5♥.

Interesting, I was considering 3♠ as a preemptive action...

Yes, 4531 or 4621. But with 3 card support and a void in their suit it is unlikely to be right to defend, and defend you might if you double now. Not that it's awful, I just think that's too much of a risk.

XX, looks fairly textbook.

That's an interesting inference Helene - it does come down to whether partner has wasted values in hearts. A club void wouldn't be terribly useful here either. I signed off, but it could be wrong.

Ochinko - I think 2♥ by a passed hand must promise a fit. I tried creating hands for partner. Assuming you have a trump loser, I think partner needs a pretty perfect hand to make 4♠ a good contract. My call was 2♠, but maybe 3♠ would have been better.

Wouldn't expect him to have 4 spades, 5 diamonds and a forcing bid (implying some heart tolerance) AND enough clubs so that the LHO didn't bother to raise opening... In other words, if partner bids 2♦ forcing with 4-1-5-3, he is crazy (and why woulnd't he bid forcing 2♣ anyway? that would definitely be a better tool to find spade fit when fearing that 1♠ would be passed by me. We play 2♣ there as promising a heart fit. Even if 2♦ was NF, I'd play 2♣ as either having a fit or GF strength.

What rebid do (41)35s make? Doesn't sound like a bad idea, only time would tell whether it would catch on... but I'd much rather the 2♦ opener was moved to 2♥ :rolleyes:

My 2 cents - yes you might get more penalties with 13-15 bal, but you'll also get redoubled and miss your fit if you don't have a sensible way to run. Is this where I mention Lionel? ;)

My thoughts... Double is yucky. May the auction continue 3C-P-4C back to you. Luis - 3♦ sounds like a huge underbid, I'd expect a minimum overcall to compete to 3♦ here with 4 card support. My choice at the table was 3♠. At the time I was certain it was forcing (until partner passed it), but on reflection maybe it should be showing a 5-6 intermediate hand, as we play split range Michaels. Partner's hand was Ax x KJTxxx xxxx, 3♠ didn't play quite as well as 5♦!

Presumably Richard would expect his partner to pass 3♦ with the weakest hands with 4 card support?

He's playing strong diamond, not sure you are allowed to support it ;)

Four.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sqt54hakj632da73c]133|100|Scoring: MP RHO opens 1♣. Double or overcall? What's your call after (1♣)-1♥-(P)-2♦, (3♣)? 2♦ from partner was forcing.[/hv]

I quite like Woolsey against a strong NT, despite the Capp 2M overcalls forcing us to the 3 level at times...that loss is counteracted by differentiating between 5M4+m and 4M5+m hands. I know that when I first psyche a strong NT in 3rd seat, it will go P-3NT-P-P-X B) so I guess I should make sure I have a run-out suit!

I'm not quite sure what the alternative to 4♥ is - are we meant to pass or make a slam try?!

The problem with this logic is that partner has shown neither 8-10 points, nor that he is balanced! Double is fine, 2D and 2H are ok but not to my taste. 2C as the majors is good, but using it on 4M5m intending to play in 3m if you don't have a fit is scary - you will reach 5-1 fits and you will get doubled! Similar with 2S, there's no reason to presume pard will have 8-10 points, particularly as your strength leaves less for him.

Ok, some more comments... I'd prefer to play in a 4-3 at the 2 level rather than a 5-2 at the 3 level. The problem is that if we do that (eg bid 2H over 2C with 4342) then we will play in a 4-3 instead of a 5-4 when partner has spades or diamonds. Astro always anchors to hearts with both majors, Aspro always anchors to spades. This solves some of the above problems but has the effect of losing the unanchored major when it is the shorter of the two. Aspro is slightly better than Astro, but conventional wisdom is that neither is as good as Asptro. The 2m bids are always 5-4s. If you bid it on 4-4 and partner is (32)44 with 3 card support for the major you have anchored to, he will ask you for your five card suit. You will now land up in a 4-2! 4441s shouldn't bid, 5440s can bid if you treat them as two suiters. After a penalty double...weak hands pull, strong hands don't. If they run immediately then I prefer forcing pass over 2m, takeout doubles over 2M. If they make a forcing pass then bidding immediately shows a weak hand that knows where it wants to play, bidding after the XX has been passed around to you shows a weak hand that doesn't know where it wants to play, bidding after they have run is constructive NF. BTW, I wouldn't recommend double to show the minors in 4th seat. *By a passed hand*, I play that double shows either a minor or both majors, 4-4, or 5-4 (not 4-5). Now you've removed the 5-4 shape from 2C the odds tilt in favour of bidding 2H over 2C with a 4324 IMO.

Anchoring to the shorter major is known as Asptro. The best write-up I've found is here - the biggest error is that it calls it Astpro instead :unsure: