MickyB

Oh, sorry, mistook "4+ controls" for greater than four. Now I see why this was posted :rolleyes: I still prefer 4♣. Getting too high will require pard to have precisely two aces, not the king of clubs and a load of soft values, and slam could still be on a finesse. If I bid 3♠ and partner shows 5 controls, I'll be too high before I know if he has either of the black queens.

4♣ seems routine - I need two aces, the king of clubs and some fillers to make slam a good bet here.

Dbl - either takeout or exactly 3 hearts, depending upon agreements. Takeout in SAYC 1NT - 18-19 Pass - minimum, 3-5♣ including all 12-14 balanced with a doubleton heart and some with three hearts - why would you bid again on these hands? Having said that, I'm not sure if this is SAYC or not. Playing 12-14 NT, you need to act again on 15-17 bal, either with a double or 1NT. If 1NT, you have to decide what you will do with no stopper in the opps suit.

Claus - this is fixed in 4.5.9, download that here.

The latter method works for the opening, but I've had some problems with getting the continuations (if you want them to be the same/similar) to still appear for the exception.

1. Yes 2. Bottom = 1st seat, and it goes anti-clockwise.

I guess this vul will always lead to some accidents - you will want to either double or compete to 5♥ on on a large proportion of hands, and opener will not be in a position to make a unilateral decision on many of them. I agree totally with North's call, he has no reason to believe that 4♠ isn't cold. I disagree with South's double, but I think it is close.

Why? Because he thinks it is more useful than having a natural club bid... Club single suiters then have to choose between pass, double and 3NT. I think I prefer 4C as nat in direct seat and 2 suited in passout seat (because 3NT without a stop is less likely to be wrong-sided) but I play it as natural throughout in all of my partnerships.

Frances - Joker's post gives the following as an example of a red system: "a system that uses conventional 'weak' or 'multi-meaning' bids (with or without some weak option) in potentially contestable auctions, other than those described in the main part of the WBF Convention Booklet " I believe the Multi is in the Convention Booklet, so it shouldn't be a red system?

Fair enough Phil, after all 3♠ tick will still be a bad score when we could have been 3♥-1 - but partner is still there, he can whack it if he has a little defence.

I'd rather he could have a weak NT this time, and not have to wonder if he has a strong NT when I am dealt a similar hand two or three points weaker...

Why not double again? If pard can pass it you are rather happy, if not you can bid 3♠ over 3Red if you want to.

At a teaching table with four of me, I had no problem.

I can't see an alternative to 7♣, most likely hand is AKxxxx xxx x Kxx possibly with a little extra.

3♦. Maybe partner has Ax in ♥ and we just right-sided 3NT.

Double. Pass is too likely to lead to +100 instead of +620, or -110 instead of +140. My biggest worry is that partner will play me for 6-3-3-1 and remove the double when nothing makes at the 3 level.

Yuck... I rate this pretty close between pass and 4♣ (Doubling or bidding 4♥ is far too likely to land me in the wrong strain). 4♣ will often get us overboard, but I'm not exactly expecting to get rich defending 3♠ undoubled!

Do you have an agreement about partner's double? I would have bid 3♦ over the redouble, expecting pass to be to play; I agree with Mark that 2N sounds like 2 places to play, so I bid 3♦, if I pass again partner might think I actually have something more than Kx in ♠.

Nice one Free :D Doesn't seem to work on BBO though :(

My opinion is in line with Peter's here. Another question - If North had doubled twice then bid 3♥ over 3♦, what would that show?

I've been having trouble using a variable NT with FD - I think it may be picking the range based on East-West's vulnerability, rather than the vulnerability of the side using it.

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=sqj73hqjt54dkq3c8&s=sa5ha72daj9872ct9]133|200|Scoring: XIMP Our auction was (P) -1♦-(2♣)- X (3♣)- P - (P) - X (P) -3♦ - AP. [Thanks Owen - auction corrected] 1♦is natural, unlimited and unbalanced (may have longer ♣), includes most 11s and few 10s.[/hv]

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sqj87hqdakq64caj8&s=sa6hakj92dj9ckt75]133|200|Scoring: IMP Starting 1♦:1♥ 1♠:2♣ 1♠ shows an unbalanced hand, 2♣ is 4th suit GF. How should the auction continue?[/hv]

K+R (which I don't trust) evaluates this at 9.95 points; Binky (which I do) evaluates it at about 10.4. I think I overvalued the club suit, it needs an ace or a king.