MickyB

Mixed cues are taking over in Britain too I think, wouldn't like to hazard a guess at proportions though - Frances? Personally I think showing only first round controls is fundamentally flawed.

IMO, if your NT range is any narrower than 3 points then an invite in NT is worse than useless.

Heart for me. I wouldn't touch a trump with a barge poll

I disagree. I agree.

Your double is clearcut. If you had more HCP, your partner would probably have fewer.

I was the 2♠ bidder - Despite taking Owen's double as takeout, my instinct at the time was the same as yours. But what if the 2♠ bidder has a stiff club and wants to compete? He needs double to be takeout, and the double should mean the same from both sides.

Because partner will frequently have a hand that wants to sell out to 3♣ if you have two of them, but not if you have one. That stiff makes a *lot* of difference. Worst case scenario, they make 3♣ doubled. That "bucket" of IMPs is only twice as many as the (much more frequent) double part-score swing. If conceding that doubled game is likely to send you or your partner on tilt, then I'd agree, competing here isn't a good idea - but I believe that doubling here will increase our IMP expentancy on this hand, which is all that matters in my partnerships. It could cost them trump tricks to lead trumps. The tempo they give up to take trumps out could let us establish our tricks elsewhere. They might not lead one anyway. Partner could easily have diamond tolerance. If none of these things are true, we may well quietly drift one or two off against their part-score - people don't make marginal penalty doubles at IMPs.

I don't see how double is in any way "for the fourth suit only". You are showing interest in competing in Diamonds, Spades, and possibly even Hearts.

I'd expect 2♠ to be fairly solid if 5 cards, perhaps lighter if 6 cards - in the former case we have half of the points, in the latter we have a 6-2 spade fit, so I don't want to sell out here with shortness - either double (if takeout) or 3♦ (if double is pens). Which should it be? It should definitely be the same both under and over the club bidder IMO, so that you can pick up penalties from both sides, and a values double isn't much use when you have both limited your hands. I think double should be takeout. If one partner has a penalty double the other will (95%+ of the time) have a takeout double, so no problem there; and you want the 2♠ bidder to be able to suggest competing without being unilateral about it, after all the hand could be a complete misfit.

You play a strong club but have 18-19 balanced in your 1♦ opening? Interesting... After 1♦:1♠ 1NT = Both minors 2♣ = 4 hearts 2♦ = 6♦ 2♥ = Good raise; Or both minors, strong - whichever you prefer. Could probably make it 2 way... After 1♦:1♥ You can use 1NT and 2♣ to distinguish between canape and not

CD? In the old days, if you wanted to sing "Happy Birthday" to someone 35 times you had to use a cassette tape, somehow it felt so much more personal. Happy Birthday guys ;)

Ditto, although I think a pass is fine if you want to have a free bid promise slightly more. Swings and roundabouts

2♦ - really need two spades opposite to be going anywhere.

Was just talking about this with Owen, cos my opps had the same thing (but with a weak 2♦) come up today. A very good player made a double on a sick 3325 11 count, which I think is insane. I'm thinking it should either be penalties, or it should be two-way (either penalties or something along the lines of a 4405 8 count). I'd normally double immediately with (non-min) values for a 2NT overcall but no stop.

Interesting. Any chance you could give us example(s) of "the hand"?

Yup, not opening this 2♣. 2NT isn't ridiculous but I still prefer 1♦. Hard to say when I'd jump to 3♣ without knowing what a minimum response looks like. I'd rather only jump with a monster (given that I could easily have one and decide not to open 2♣) and have partner respect my GF than jump on a random 18/19 and have partner pass if he has a minimum. I think I'd need the queen in one of my regular partnerships, and the jack in another.

I don't think a Siege 1♣ opener (natural or balanced, includes 5♦332 but not 4♦5+♣) would fit well with a strong ♦, because I don't see much merit in defining a strong artificial opening as unbalanced - when I play a strong ♣ I quite like it when I've opened it on 16-18 balanced, because I'm now happy to pass in most competitive auctions. You also haven't suggested a way of opening hands with 4♦5+♣ or 4M5+♦. You could make it something like 1♣ 11-13 balanced or 11-16 ♣+another (could have longer ♦), transfer responses 1♦ any 17+ 1M 5 cards or 4M5+♦ 1N 14-16 2♦ single suiter 2♣ would probably be best used to remove hands from 1♣ - 4♣longer♦ and ♣ single suiter would both be reasonable meanings. Don't think there is much between this and a similar strong club system, you lose one step for the strong hands (when opps will often bid anyway) and gain one for the more nebulous opening. Coming back to Siege... I think you need to think of the 1♦ opener not just as a better defined bid than in Standard, but as an aid to auctions after the (frequent) 1♣ opener - knowing that partner can't have an unbalanced hand with a 2nd suit in ♦ is useful both in constructive and competitive auctions.

I may be wrong, but I think the auction is uncontested - the battle is with our partner!

And just the other day, I played a 22HCP 90% grand. I played it in 2♣, but that's not the point.

Not much to add, but I think 3♦ is clear. Can't think why I wouldn't just bid out my shape.

Back to the original question, which was presumably based on strong NT + 5cM - 2NT is natural, about 16-17. Could be 5332, could be 5422 where 2NT is a better description than bidding your 2nd suit (typically will have doubleton honours and/or Axxx/xxxx in the 2nd suit)

Ok, I managed to forget the auction (was thinking it was 1M:1N, 2N) but I still think 15-16 should be passing 2M. A 9 count should make a limit raise with 4 card support or a 2/1 with 3 card support.

Which is why partner 2/1s with a half-decent 9 count. Particularly if it has a partial fit.

What Justin said. I'm not sure whether the alternative is meant to be 2NT or 3♣, but either way it isn't close

IMO you should be passing 15-16 and some 17s, the reason Acol uses light 2/1s is to reach game opposite 15-16 flat.