MickyB

4♥ before looks a little much. Anything other than pass now is crazy.

3♥ looks normal to me

Close between P and 5♦. I agree that once you've doubled 5♣, it is absolutely clear for partner to pass it.

The main advantage of Polish Club is that when you open 1♣, partner can assume you have a weak no-trump and bid accordingly, with little regard for the other possible hand-types in the 1♣ opening. Playing SAYC (or any "natural" system) you will face uncomfortable decisions where you want to make one bid if partner has a balanced minimum and a different bid if partner is known to be unbalanced/have a five-card suit. Opposite a hand that is known to be balanced, negative freebids work very well (similar to 1NT-(2♥)-2♠ being "to play"); opposite a hand that is likely to be unbalanced, partner could have a void opposite your suit, so negative freebids don't work nearly so well.

Pass, Pass, Pass, 3♠ looks obvious.

I wouldn't need a huge amount more to bid 2♣, this seems a bit much though.

Held a vaguely similar hand today - KJ9xx Kxx Jxx Tx. 1♣-(1♦)-1♠-(P), 1NT-(P)-? Partly inspired by this thread I bid 2♠, both contracts were one off, pard didn't seem to appreciate my 2♠ rebid though!

Seems right to play the J from QJ...it's more likely that partner can count you for a queen than for a jack.

1N I guess. Not sure about the methods - 1C:1NT works fine when played as very wide ranging - 11-13 bal passes, 17-19 bal bids on, 14-16 unbal can rebid 2♣, even on five cards, safe in the knowledge that responder will have 3+clubs. After 1C:1N, 2C, 2D/H/S/N would be fragments showing the upper end of the 1NT range.

AQ98 opposite xxx for three tricks. Obviously, when you play small to the eight, it loses to a minor honour. More below in hidden text, includes spoiler, and also includes the "unusual" part of the question:

Just because I like to disagree... Pass has more going for it at IMPs (+90 against +110/140 is only an imp or two. At MPs it could be massive, particularly with some EW pairs going one off). Your hand may supply more tricks in a 5-1 spade fit, but so will your opponents' hands. If you had the ♠9 I'd better understand Jdonn's comment. I definitely bid 2♠ at MPs. At IMPs, it depends on our style for a 1NT rebid.

Look at it this way - it's a fair bit better than a Precision 2♣ that could be opened on 5♣4M, and probably as descriptive as a 6+card 2♣ opening that could have a side four-card major.

Yes, your original 1♦ opening was definitely underloaded...after all, those are the same hands that you have in a 1♠ opening when using transfer openings. Quite how well the 1♦ opening would fare, I don't know, and presumably it would still be less frequent than your 1M openings, but if the major two-suiters are problematic in a 1M opening, then this would seem a reasonable solution. BTW, I encountered similar issues while creating a strong club, four-card major system. As you may remember, I eventually gave up on using the 1♦ opening for these hands, and had it show precisely four spades, which was much more frequent and solved the issue of major two-suiters. Unbalanced hands without a four-card major are better handled by descriptive, slightly preemptive 2m openings, in an effort to get to the right spot quickly and put the opposition to the last guess.

It's supposed to say that the *1*♦ opening would include those hands.

I think this question was intended as "should jumps be weak or strong" :) There are definitely hands that are too good to bid 2M but too offensive to double - you could land up defending 1NT X making (with overtricks) when your side is cold for game. If you play a 3M jump as preemptive, then you need to decide between 2M and 4M on the stronger hands. After 1NT-P-P, a jump should definitely show a good hand.

Yup, 2♠ as 11 points, 2NT as 12 points is disturbingly common. I've even seen people use this over their (15-17) 1NT overcall, presumably leaving 3NT as either 9-10 or 13+ :(

I don't get it. 1♠ p 2♠ isn't forcing. Responder has shown a rather better hand on the original sequence.

Forcing because fits are nice.

I think I can make myself available.

Tempted by 3♥ - has to show 5/5 in the majors, there's no other hand on which I'd pass in 3rd then act later at this level. I hate a 1♠ opening, if you bid your hearts later pard will place you on a much better hand, so if you are going to give up on showing your second suit you may as well preempt in spades.

Yup, it is as clear to act this round as it was to pass last round. The most common shape for doubling here is probably 1435, I'd have thought, so double feels right here.

[hv=d=s&s=saxxxhjdak98xc98x]133|100|Scoring: XIMP 1D:1H 1S:2C 2D:2S ??[/hv]

Interesting, Foo...could you post more details?

So a balanced 17 opposite a nothing hand has to reach the 3 level, in what isn't even a sure fit? Or must a random 8 jump over the double opposite a potential 11-13? I'm not sure whether it's best to allow 11-13 bal to reopen or not; However, the issues aren't too different from a natural system. If anything, you are better placed here than if you were playing 14-16 NT and five-card majors.

Hang on...isn't 6♠ pretty poor without the spade nine? I hereby conclude that I would bid on as North, and that South is short the spade nine of a 4♠ bid :rolleyes: At first, I didn't think South was worth a 4♠ bid, but I guess you want to get there opposite some fairly normal, fairly minimum doubles, so it must be worth 4♠. Think North is just about worth another move...not quite sure what, though.