MickyB

From the title of your post, I thought you were suggesting that you play the responses to 1NT as showing keycards. I think that would be a much better idea.

I tend to be more foolish at the table than here - I felt it was marginal when I saw the hand, so I'd undoubtedly have bid it at the table!

My verdict on Keylime's list... 1) 2/1 GF - I've got mixed views, I quite like light 2/1s, and I definitely prefer a 2C relay and 2D over 1S showing hearts, but 2/1 GF except rebid with a semi-forcing NT is ok. 2) Everything Bergen - agree wholeheartedly. 3) Support doubles - Agreed, I'd much rather have a takeout double in most sitations. 4) CAPP and DONT - Yup, DONT is awful and CAPP isn't great. 5) Gerber - I don't think it deserves the stick it gets. Not that it is useful very often... 6) Two suited overcalls - Vital, but I think that playing them as 6-10 or 16+ (common in the UK) when vulnerable is, as you put it, "providing a roadmap". I'd rather they were 8-12 or 17+, or something like that. 7) I've never used a game-try double, but I much prefer to play takeout doubles in most auctions. 8) Opening 1NT with a 5 card major - fine. I'd much rather open it 1NT than have no way of showing the hand later. 9) Transfers in competition are very powerful. 10) Not quite sure what you are trying to say about 4th suit forcing. 11) I agree that a weak 2D is very useful, but some of these artificial preempts aren't bad. 12) Mini-Roman/Flannery - these need to be filling a pretty big hole before I would consider playing them. 13) Puppet Stayman - Yeah, I agree that it is shocking the way I play it at the moment (3S response showing 5S4H). I'll be much more comfortable once I've got that into the 3C response, leaving 3S+ to deal with hands with minor suits. 14) Ace asking bids - agreed, Turbo is much better!

I'm not sure about point 2, Josh - a 4♣ cue may leave more room for cuebidding, but a 4♦ cue is more descriptive.

1 - pass at any scoring 2 - It is tempting to pass because it is matchpoints, but I think I would probably bid 2♠ even so 3 - spade at any scoring

Yup, that is still the case Josh. Opener only bypasses a 4 card major if 4333.

Agree with all that except the loser counting, Justin. Covering 2 losers = 3 off = 500, but I agree that partner may not be able to do that.

That wasn't what I said - If partner had bid 5♣ himself, that would have taken away another 5 steps. You bidding 5♣ now takes away only three steps, and makes it much easier for them to do the right thing.

If you were going to commit to 5♣, it would have put much more pressure on opener for your partner to have bid 5♣ at the first opportunity. If partner couldn't bid 5♣, then why should you? I could understand wanting to bid 5♣ now if you were 6-4 shape, as that hand would typically be better offensively iff partner has a ♣ fit - that would make you not worth an immediate 4♣ bid, but possibly worth more now. Even so, I would pass and hope that when they make "the last guess", they guess incorrectly.

I would have bid my major playing SAYC and 1NT playing 2/1 GF. Sounds from the posts above that maybe I overestimate the number of 2/1ers who play Walsh. I vote that we make transfer responses to 1♣ our standard, then it is obvious what to bid ;)

Bidding again doesn't take that much space away - only 3 steps (they lose a level, but gain a pass and a double). I don't think your defence to 4M is that poor- you expect a club trick, and your red suit honours can easily be worth something on defence. partner can see the vul too. Other than you having a stronger hand than he might expect, I see nothing that makes this different from any other 3♣ bid.

Agree that a club slam is the way to go. What else could you have held for your pass? Am thinking partner has to be a little light on high cards to not be able to bid over 3♠ despite holding a void.

If your description of the bids mentions that they could be on a 4 card suit with 9 points, then the first hand isn't a psyche. If not, then it clearly is a gross distortion and a psyche IMO.

I'm not sure how the title of the thread fits in with the hand. As far as I know, an Unassuming Cuebid is a cue of opener's suit after partner has overcalled, showing a good raise. It is now commonly (mis)used as a cue of overcaller's suit, showing a good raise of opener's suit. If you start off with a cuebid, it certainly seems better to just raise 2♠ to 3♠ - that Kx isn't really pulling its weight, and some like to make lightish doubles opposite a passed hand. Fluffy and Luis, what would you do here with 5♠?

That seems to make it a little difficult to bid slam when it is right! Not that I am saying that there aren't hands for it, of course there are, but surely fewer than a purely preemptive 5M opening.

Ok, I'll bite... What is Luis's Law?

Ok, I'm going out on a limb and passing. Partner had several ways to show spade support. For me, this is the weakest.

i've seen *many* world class players use bergen raises (not to mention the inventor of the convention)... but maybe your judgment as to its merits are better, who knows... of course you may be able to convince them they're wrong because you're bigger I agree with Alan about Bergen Raises - I think something like 1♠:3♠ = 3-7 1♠:3♦ = 8-11 (now 3♥ = reinvite) will perform nearly as well on those hands, and then 3♣ is free for something else. If you are prepared to stick the limit raises into the 2NT raise then all of your jump-shifts are free.

I'm bigger than you Micky! Argument over! :) :P And while someone mentioned it - Bergen Raises. What a load of tripe taking away all those lovely natural bids. Something tells me I have a weight advantage :) Lovely natural bids? You meant to say "lovely mini-splinters", I presume?

Cheers Justin - just goes to show that Bob is a reasonable player :P Actually, I reckon that it ties in with his passion for opening 4 card majors.

Mike Playing strong NT (14-17 or so) and 4 card suits, as I prefer to do in 3rd+4th seat, I want to be able to pass a 2/1 response when I have nowhere else to go - typically 11-13 balanced, but sometimes an unbalanced hand with tolerance for responder's suit. For that reason, I want a 2/1 response to show 5 cards in the bid suit and deny 3 cards in mine - otherwise we miss our major suit 5-3 fit which could easily produce a game.

I love that you rate Drury as one of the worst, and I one of the best :P remind me to have an argument with you about it sometime.

Good choices Josh, Matchpoints is amazing. I think that Killing Defence is aimed at a higher level than your other "advancing" books.

I think Transfer Checkback has 2♥ as 5♥4♠ NF. 2♣ is a puppet to 2♦, as in Two-Way Checkback, and 2♦ is a transfer to hearts.

I consider takeout doubles to include negative doubles, snapdragon doubles, etc - they are all just names for a double showing that you wish to compete. I'm not sure that stayman is that important. 2suit nat NF, 2NT/3suit nat forcing works pretty well.