case_no_6

Assuming that expert standard methods are being used, it is challenging but possible to reach 7S. 1S - 2N 3C - 3S 4C - 4D 4H - 5H 5N - 7S Pass Note that I am assuming that opener does not rebid 4D to show a 5-5. It is not that I do not like this approach, but rather that I believe that to make this bid both suits need to feature good quality suits. (The failure to bid 4C to show a void confirms I assumed the 5-5 jump bid approach.) Thus 3C showed shortness, 3S showed no cue bid available and is waiting - one should not sign-off in 4S with such excellent trumps and welcome news about such useful shortness - and now opener's 4C confirms a club void. Now it is easy for responder to cue bid Kings having denied a red suit Ace with 3S. After responder's 5H bid, all that needs to be done is to check for trump suit quality with 5NT.

As far as I can see you bid two suits and partner chose not to raise your 5 card spade suit to the 2 level. Why would he have raised your spade suit to the 2 level had you bid 1S instead of 1NT? Seems to me that partner is blaming you for his mistake.

I play the Jack of spades next. If either opponent wins the Queen - I win any return and lead to the 8 of spades which now is an entry to the hearts for diamond discards. If the Jack wins and both have followed suit, I will be impressed by the opponents for their excellent defensive card reading. All I can do now is to draw trump without losing a spade and lead the Jack of diamonds. I will hope to get lucky with the diamond situation. If spades are 4-0, there is nothing that can be done to make this.

2D would be merely competitive and 3C is forcing and strongly suggests diamond support. Therefore, 3D is encouraging/invitational, but non-forcing. Holding AQxx, Jx, KQJxx, xx as responder, one has game forcing values with a known diamond fit. Thus a bid of 3D does not adequately reflect the values of the hand and the forcing bid of 3C (which strongly suggests diamond support) is mandatory.

There really is no danger on this hand since, with AK of spades on your left, LHO would have led a top spade. So there are not 3 spade losers - as long as you lead spades twice from Dummy. So, since trumps are splitting 2-2 or 3-1, win the first trump in Dummy, win the second trump in hand, and if necessary finish drawing trump ending in dummy. (If trumps are 2-2, you simply lead a club now. You can pitch a spade on the club and ruff both diamond losers.) Assuming the 3-1 trump split and having ended in Dummy, you now lead a spade. If RHO flies with an honor, you have no problems; when you get in you will lead a club to provide a discard for the diamond loser you cannot ruff. If LHO wins, you again will lead a club when you next get in to establish a pitch of a diamond. Your diamond ruff will be the entry you need for the second spade lead from Dummy.

You can't bid 5H with only 4 hearts. There is no guarantee that partner has 4 hearts. I bid 4NT and correct 5C to 5D to show this hand.

Try using the BBO ACBL convention card

Since you are resistant or unwilling to adopt (insist upon) conventional approaches (e.g., 4 level transfers such as Texas), the answer is that there is no way. You will have to have SOME special agreement. For example, you might use Splinter jumps after a 2 level transfer when you have shortness. That is a conventional approach. If you don't have shortness but a long suit and slam interest, you simply have to assign some bid to show that. I just don't see any way around it. Conventions provide additional robustness to bidding. That's why we are willing to adopt conventions in some cases and give up the natural meaning of some bids.

Whenever partner follows up an ace askin 4NT with a king asking 5NT, it guarantees no aces are missing and invites a grand slam. Partner could hardly be unhappy with 3 kings and is surely prepared for that response. Regardless, 5NT is a grand slam invite, so if you have something good that is unexpected - e.g., a long and strong side suit that will produce extra tricks, you are free to bid the grand even with a king or two fewer.

I largely agree with Caitlynne's comments here. However, I think that Pass, not Double, is right with the West hand. If East reopens with a Double, the standard bid is/should be 2NT showing this hand with clubs. That's because a negative Dbl risks 3D from opener and then West would be stuck. Switch West's clubs and diamonds, however, and a negative Dbl is best because now West can correct East's bid of 3C with 3D. Of course, I have to wonder why East did not open 1NT. Perhaps, however, that is avoided with a small doubleton?

Technically, 5S is a sign-off. Looking at the actual holding of your partner, it is clear that both the 4NT and 5S bids were poorly conceived.

According to modern practice and dating to at least as early as 1950-ish, raises to any level after a takeout double are obstructive (preemptive).

With all of your example holdings, I think you have to Double. You are just too strong to Pass. If you do, and it goes Pass by LHO and partner dutifully reopens with a double, just what bid will you be able to make then? For these reasons, there is a school of thought that handles this auction by bidding 1S with exactly 4 spades and Doubles otherwise. Double is still negative for takeout.

Pulling out 5NT is probably not the best move in a new partnership. However, with that said, what to do? I would think that 5NT could have two reasonable meanings in the absence of discussion: 1. I am not sure whether to accept. You decide, partner. 2. I am accepting, but I have real clubs and 3 card diamond support. Pick a slam - 6C, 6D, or 6NT. I personally don't think the first meaning is particularly useful on a frequency basis. But the second meaning is intelligent and will occur frequently. It is the one I would presume and, if I am wrong, I have learned that the potential for this new partnership to flourish does not seem too bright.

Regardless of whether 1S shows 4+ or 5+ spades, a raise to the 3 level promises at least 4 card support. So, 3H (whatever it might mean as some kind of spade raise) is not appropriate. And, for the same reason, 3S (regardless of how you define its meaning) is not appropriate. What are reasonable alternatives? I suggest there are 3 possible bids to consider: 2S; 2H; and 2D. I think you have too much for 2S, even considering that lack of a 4th spade is a defect. You have 3 aces and a singleton - control of all suits and your lower honors are supporting aces. This is a too good for just a minimum rebid. 2D with the plan to support spades next is reasonable, but I don't think you really have quite enough for this even though it is close. A negative to this plan is that it takes a while to raise spades and you will be raising to the 3 level and partner could be pretty weak. On the positive side, at least RHO has passed, so the auction is not likely to get competitive and you should get a chance to raise spades without going beyond the 3 level. I like 2H best. It tells partner you have 3+ spades and better than a 2S raise. It is flexible and keeps the bidding low. If partner bails with 2S, you can pass confidently, having shown your good hand and support. If partner does something more encouraging, you are well placed to continue showing your values. Case_No_6

You could play it asking for a stopper, but the standard agreement/meaning is a spade raise. It is better than the immediate value bid of 2S or 3S. So it is like a 3.5S bid or better.

3D. You have 11 dummy points - encouraging (invitational) and not forcing. This is a textbook hand for the bid. Anything else is just masterminding.

I would never bid 5H now. That would be voluntarily be taking the last guess. I never do that when I could have made the opponents take the last guess by bidding 5H at my first turn. To me, that was the obvious bid instead of making that cowardly 4H transfer to 4S.

Sorry, but 2D does not show extras in Expert Standard, though it could easily be made on a very good hand - perhaps as many as 18 HCP. In standard, the jump shift rebid (even over 1NT) is 100% game forcing. In this case, the 3D rebid may very well be made on a genuine two suited hand (with spades and diamonds), but this will not always be the case. Opener might have only 4 diamonds and powerful spades or, infrequently, partner might have a long powerful spade suit and a "manufactured" diamond suit of only 3 cards with a hand unable to raise NT (e.g., AKJTxx, Ax, KQJ, xx - a hand just shy of a 2C opener). For this reason, it is a mistake to raise diamonds with poor 4 card support, even to the 4 level. It is best to mark time by taking a false preference to 3S and await developments. I bid 3S. I just don't see any other intelligent choice. After a jump shift rebid, the preference rebid is the expected action whenever responder does not have something important to show. I don't have anything worth showing, so it is best to make the most flexible bid available to enable partner to finish describing his hand.

Playing standard defensive bidding methods, I would pass over 1H. (If 1NT is available as a light takeout, however, I would do that.) Over 2H on my left and back to me, I am inclined to balance. Dbl, 2NT, and 3C are all reasonable. I suspect that partner will have 4 or 5 hearts, so I think it is likely that we likely will face a forcing defense. That to me suggests that it is best to balance into my 6 card suit - that is likely to be our best chance of a plus score on offense. 3C also best positions us for our best chance for defending 3H, a contract where we seem likely to earn a plus score. Regardless of whether this is IMPs or MPs, a plus score is unlikely to be a bad result, so going plus is my goal on this deal.

It is impossible to know what is right because the opponents are not unlikely to be able to take anywhere from 10 to 12 tricks in diamonds - it all depends on the specifics of the deal. But we have no way to find out what is going on and we need to act now. These are the decisions for which the Law of Total Tricks is so comforting. We have 10 or 11 trump and they have 10 or 11 trump. On average, there are about 21 trump, so typically, if they can make a game or slam, we have a cheap save. I don't go nuts here, since we might be making game and they might be going down and, of course, it might be one of those hands where the Law is off a trick or two. 5C.

I think 2H is okay as a direct overcall of 1S, but I would not recommend (or choose) it because: 1. My spades have body and my hearts do not, so even though the chances of 3 card or longer heart support with partner are fairly high, my offensive to defensive ratio is fairly low for such a nice hand. 2. Partner is a passed hand, so the chances of missing a game are lower than if partner were not a passed hand. 3. Given the lessened chances of game, the vulnerability (favorable) tips the scales rather strongly toward defending rather than declaring. Regardless, after passing 1S, there is no way that it is likely to be right to bid over 2S. It almost surely is right to defend with 5 spades including 3 honors sitting over the spade length with the opponents.

First off, I don't see any way to get around not occasionally raising partner's response of 1M to 2M on 3 card support unless you are playing some sort of non-standard system (e.g., transfer responses over 1C openings). Second, in my partnerships, I like to play some version of a convention most often known as Spiral, where the most economical bid available (my preference) or always 2NT (yuck!) asks for further information about 3 vs. 4 card support and minimum vs. maximum values.

Pass. 1. I have some defense, so we may beat this. 2. Though I do have spade support, it is weak and only 3 cards long. 3. Partner does not have to have a good hand to overcall spades at the 1 level. Even if partner does have good values, we might not be able to make 4S while they are failing at 4H. 4. Partner is not prohibited from bidding again when his/her hand is suitable.

A lot depends on the strength promised by 1NT, the vulnerability, and the form of the game - all conditions that have not been specified. At MPs, I would balance anytime I am not vulnerable. (Many will open 2H when not vulnerable, so there will be some level of field protection.) If vulnerable, I would balance if I think my opponents would be unlikely to double me or if I feel I need a board. Most opponents will not double (when it is right) unless I am vulnerable and they are not, so I am usually bidding unless red vs. white. At IMPs, it depends on the size of the NT. With 15 to 17 or so, it is more difficult because partner could have a good 15 or 16 HCP and a heart fit with spade cards, making a game contract a reasonable proposition. But my gut says that I am generally passing when vulnerable and generally bidding when not. In general, our side is unlikely to make game - so the reward is a plus score at a part score contract - while there is considerable risk you could go for a large penalty if doubled. With a weak NT, I am probably bidding. The chance of being able to make a part score is greater AND the chances of being doubled into game are also diminished quite a bit.