MickyB

If you go into the "View" and stop it from showing neutrals (and enemies), then you'll have all of the stars displayed.

I do care, it's just you have a habit of making your problems too hard :) I guess I'm starting off with 4 or 5♣. In theory, the later decision should be a simpler calculation at total points, at least if you ignore the SOTM. At a guess, we will average 4 off in 7♣, maybe slightly less, so we rate to be -600 or so for bidding on, so we should save if they rate to make slam 65%+ of the time. Given that partner hasn't doubled after I've already given away the position of any trumps that he holds, I think it looks right to bid on.

If you have already shown 5S6D and no heart control, is it really necessary to jump over 4N to show your void? :) I feel like I should be able to get there with detailed enough agreements...it will start 1♦:1♥ 1♠:3♦ 3♠:4♦ 4♠:4N 5♣:5♦ 3♠ shows 5-6, 4♦ shows good trumps (if they were only Kxx responder would have cued 4♥), no club control and denies 3♠, 4♠ cue denies A/K♥ but could still have shortage, 4N shows an even number of keycards, 5♦ is an attempt to play due to not having much more to show. There's now rather a lot of room, but 5NT (normally denying the trump queen) isn't defined on this auction. There's probably a case for responder to cue his jack of spades now on the basis that K♦, A♥, Q♠ would be a huge hand on this auction and could just take control...I'm not sure if this auction is technically achievable or not, but I'm certain we wouldn't be confident enough to pull it off!

I think 1=2=5=5 would be a pass of 2♦, it is only a suggestion to play after all. 1=2=4=6 is a 2♠ bid if I'm just trying to reach our best spot...but these things need to be mixed up a bit, you don't want 2♦:2♠, 3♥ telling the opps that we have a 9+card heart fit and that they have an 8+card spade fit.

I agree with what has been said so far, except I think the only options over 2♠ are pass and double. Double is right on shape, but I don't think you are quite strong enough - partner won't have more than about 9 points, so game is a long way off; and there's no reason to believe you want to compete if partner can't bid again.

This is a disgusting set of problems, in stark contrast to the set that I've just done that I suspect are from the current issue of the same magazine! 1. 3♦. 2♦ and 3♣ are NF, so it's between 2♠ and 3♦. If my spades and clubs were reversed I'd try 2♠ here, but with only Kxx in spades I think 3♦ is a better initial description here. If partner rebids 3♥ or 3♠ I think I am ok; If partner rebids 3NT I am on a nasty guess, given that partner could have anything from a decent 3334 9 count to a 3316 with something extra. I'm finding it much easier to construct hands where we belong in a minor than hands where we belong in 3NT on this auction, so I think I'm content to rebid 3♦ and pull 3NT to 4♣. Hopefully partner won't care greatly whether I am 3-1 or 1-3 in the majors; if he did, he might well have tried 3M over 3♦. QJx QTx x AJTxxx makes 6♣ a better contract than 3NT. 2. 3♥. Double then 3♦ will be a strong single-suiter, I suspect. 3. 4♦, second choice pass. I'd expect partner to act aggressively with short spades, so I don't think he has much over there, but 5♦ has reasonable-to-good chances opposite some pretty weak dummies. 4. 2♠, although I haven't yet decided whether this is natural or a Rubens advance showing clubs ;) 5. With nothing to cue, I may as well just try keycard (assuming 4♥ isn't last train) 6. Double. They could be stealing from me if I pass, and I think double has to be better than 4♠ here - if partner passes it then I'm quite content, we must have a club trick or two on the way. 7. 2♥, 2♦ 2nd choice. If partner is 53(41), hearts could well be better than spades, especially if partner has extras giving us time to get minor suit losers away on spades - AQJxx KJx x Axxx anyone? Depending on our style, I might land up in 4♥ opposite some 4333s (unless these might be bid 1♠:2♥, 2N:3N, P?), hopefully I'll survive with our combined 28+count. If partner just raises to 3♥ I'll jump to 4♠. 8. Small club. If I play for partner to have nothing, then in the end I'll probably get endplayed or squeezed into providing a 9th trick. A♥ is probably best at MPs but too negative at IMPs for my liking. No reason why partner can't have the J♣.

Well, I'm the lone voter for 4♠... First question, is this worth a slam-try or not? I tend to take the low road with this sort of hand, especially as I have no idea how to reach the correct strain. Having decided that, is double or 4♠ a better call? Doubles of 4M bids are often passed out; It is fairly unlikely, given my heart void and strength, that partner will pull, and even less likely that he will pull to a minor having not preempted initially. I expect 4♠ to score better, and I think it is less likely to end the auction - LHO is much more likely to compete to 5♥ over a 4♠ bid than over a double, he knows as well as I do that these doubles are often passed out for lack of anywhere better to go. I can then happily follow up with a double, and have some idea of what strain to seek slam in if partner shows any signs of life.

After our side has opened, I play all generic cuebids as game-forcing. There may well be better rules, but this seems to do well enough. I think East should have bid 4♣, preferring the cheaper of two descriptive calls. Also, opposite 2-3 in the minors it could well be right to play in clubs in order to ruff out the diamonds.

If opener is unbalanced, you have found a club fit. He can rebid 2♣ with, say, 11-15, leaving responder to go on if maximum; and reverse with 16+, knowing that 3♣ is likely to be a reasonable spot. Playing 14-16 NT and short club, I play this 1NT bid as 5-bad 12; it doesn't cause any problems.

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk63ha98653d8cj65]133|100|Scoring: IMP If you pass as dealer then your RHO will open 1♦ in 4th.[/hv]

I think this hand is a clear-cut pass, for the reasons given above - pard will still act on decent hands and you are giving info away. You are unlikely to outbid the opps when they have at least half the deck, a likely spade fit and pard couldn't preempt. I had a conversation with a decent player after she had doubled on a similar hand with Kxxxx in hearts. The auction had proceeded P-1S-X-4S; X, giving her the choice between 790 and 800 or similar. How is partner meant to know whether to act on this auction if this hand is a routine double? Btw Mike, I think requiring an alert for a 4441 9 count is a bit extreme - many consider a 4441 10 count to be a routine double in any seat, and it is IMO well known that some think it is correct to allow weaker doubles opposite a passed hand.

I understand why you are trying to separate different major suit lengths, but I don't think there's enough room to separate fours, fives and sixes immediately - you really need 1N for bal hands and either 1S or both 2C and 2D for unbalanced hands with no 4 card major. My thread on a similar idea can be found here.

I think there are far too many hands that will want to bid 3N at red, and too many at equal vul too - often they will be trying to protect a positional spade holding that, being under the opening bid, may turn out to be worthless on defence.

There seem to be two sensible hands to show - 5(35)0 and the extreme two suiter. 2NT is also available and pushes us to the same level, so I think 3C should show the 2-suiter and 2NT the semi 3-suiter - allowing a 3C cue as "what's your red suit?" and 3 of either red suit as "to play".

Hmm, the problem is that 12-14 bal isn't terribly easy to show if someone gets in there before you - particularly 12-14 bal without a 4 card major because you are unlikely to be suitable for a later takeout double. Also, what are you responding to a 3rd seat opening?

2♦ is a mini-multi, and I don't really want to give up on it. We open reasonably light, but not ridiculously so.

Nah, it's a definite minus :P

We are in the process of discussing a number of undefined competitive auctions in Siege, in preparation for the U25 trials that are approaching. Here's an interesting one - 1♦-(P)-1♥-(2♠) 1♦ showed 4+♦ unbalanced, and is the opening on any hand that is to be treated as a minor two-suiter, even if the ♣ are longer. (I think I remember us treating a couple of 22(45)s as balanced, and one 4-7 and one 4-6 (x Kx xxxx AKQxxx or similar) as single suiters) What should everything mean now? Option 1) X = takeout, shows extras 2NT = some kind of Lebensohl (probably diamonds or minors weak, or hearts strong) 3C = nat, extras, suits can be either way around 3D = nat, extras 3H = nat, min, the usual bid on 1=3 in the majors 3S+ = various extreme hands Advantage - You can show all the hands you want to. Disadvantage - Only if the opponents shut up over your 2NT bid (although following up with a double must show the strong hand with 4♥). Option 2) X = takeout, shows extras 2N = minors 3C = diamonds 3D = Heart raise, weak (can be 1=3 majors) or strong 3H = Heart raise, intermediate 3S+ = various extreme minor based hands Advantage - You can show your minor handtypes straight away. Disadvantage - you can't show a minor based hand with some extras without going past 3m (unless you bid 2N:3♣, 3♦: Pass). Option 3) X = 15+, 2+♠, <4♥ Advantage - You won't often have a penalty pass of a takeout double on this auction, so you may as well bid with those hands and have a definition for double that will sometimes get passed out. Disadvantage - I can't come up with any nice meanings for the bids :P well, transfers might work again I guess. Any advances?

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=saqxxxhkxxdqxxckx&w=shtxdkt9xxxcjtxxx&e=sxhaqjxdajxxcaqxx&s=skjxxxxxhxxxxdcxx]399|300|Scoring: IMP The board was taken from a Camrose match. Both Norths opened 1NT! At our training session, one South passed over the double. Personally, I much prefer a redouble! 6♠X didn't go for 1100 at our table, was a round suit led? Another reason to bid 6♠ directly, although I still think 5♠ is reasonable.[/hv]

I'd bid 6♠ having previous bid 5♠ because when they bid 6♦ and pard doesn't double, I think they've guessed correctly. It's not an attractive way to bid, but it certainly has its advantages.

If I started with 5♠, I'd be tempted to bid 6♠ over 6♦. If I was going to be on lead to 6♣ I'd pass it out.

It is swings and roundabouts - one way you are on slightly firmer ground when partner opens 1♦, the other way you are slightly better placed when (s)he opens 1♣. In a standard system, I am more comfortable opening my longer minor, I then think of the 1♦ opening as promising 4 cards and the 1♣ opening as promising 3.5 cards (so I'll happily raise to the 2 level on 4 card support) - don't worry about the odd occasion when 1♦ is only 3, it is rare and you may survive anyway.

At the table, I considered 5♠ and 6♠ before settling on the latter, on the basis that they would probably bid over 5♠ and I'd then want to bid 6♠, so I'd make things a bit harder for them now - rule out the chance of them finding a grand and try to get them to make the wrong decision with regards to doubling. Maybe I overestimated the chance of them bidding over 5♠. To be honest, I can't ever see them defending 4♠ so I don't like that much, when one of the opponents competes over 4♠ I think the other will happily compete over 5♠. Well, with Mark's hand you are never bidding over 6♠, and always bidding over 4♠. I guess the most interesting question is what to do over 5♠?

5♣ for me. Good work RHO, you've removed my forcing 4♣ bid :(

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=skj98653h8742dc43]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♠-(X)-? 5 card majors, in case you doubted that. Edit:What is your plan if the opps compete further?[/hv]