ochinko

So you don't really care that if partner has ♥Ax or Kxx you'll have two ♥ stoppers when you're the declarer, but only one if partner declares? How are you going to ever find a playable contract if you insist on wrong-siding it?

The thing is that if partner has spades with slam ambitions, there will be enough space to show that, but if he wants to hear whether we have half a heart stopper, he won't have a second chance below 3NT to ask for it. I prefer to lose the meaning of 3♥ as an invitation to 4♠, even if it seems more natural, because it is more valuable to me to have the double meaning (attempt for 3NT or ♠ slam invitation with 5 or less losers in the hand). At IMPs most hand that force to 3♠ will be willing to try 4♠ anyway, so nothing of importance is lost. And at MPs you'll need the opportunity to stop at 3NT even more, so there.

3NT. Not a problem indeed. Partner has either ♥Ax or ♥Jxx. Partner's 3♥ could mean strong ♠ support as well. I'll know on the next round. If that is the case it is less likely that partner will try a slam, knowing that we have wasted ♥ values.

splinter (n.) A remarkably successful way to arrive at part scores with 1:3 fits. The strongest feature of this technique is the paralyzing effect it has on your opps who invariably fail to double.

Like the others said, you should make use of supportive double (and redouble). If I don't have that, I'd pass with 4 spades as in your case, but would bid 2♥ with 2 or 3 spades as I'd have less defense in my hand.

In 2/1 2♠ means minimal values, doesn't guarantee more than 5. The way I play SA 2♠ does guarantee 6, so with minimum balanced I bid 2NT. 2♠ is non-forcing, 2NT too. 3 in the same minor is natural, non-forcing. 3♥ is natural with 5+♠/4+♥ and 18+ game-forcing.

4♠ is probably not that bad, but why should I bid it right away? Can't I double first? Is my hand much weaker than AKQTxxx-AJT9-A-A where you'd double as well (I guess)? Another question to the 4♠ bidders: If it goes (1♥) - 4♠ - (4NT/dbl) - Pass (5m) - ? are you going to sit? With that strength and the boss' suit I am not afraid to bid it slowly. 4♠ is KQJxxxx-AQx-Kx-x which has about 3 or 4 tricks less.

Why do you have to shut out opps when you hold the boss' suit? You are shutting out partner with a hand that has so much slam potential in it.

2♣ for me. 4♥ I would bid with ♠KQxxxx ♥ ♦xx ♣KQxxx but I wouldn't mind much if partner bids 4♥.

I am not sure whether 2♥ or 3♥ is better, but there is no such thing as t/o double after NT from partner. All doubles after limited bids are natural. The same goes for all doubles after partner has suggested his hand was balanced. Perhaps you have a very clever arrangement with your partner to double for t/o here, but this is B&I forum after all. I agree with helene_t that double is more like 18-19 balanced.

1NT is 8-10, and I am roughly a trick better than that, so 2nt it is.

2♠ the first time (after the rdbl). Because it's MP where the fight for the part score is fierce. Having 6 spades, and quite solid too, and knowing that I will be willing to compete with them to the second level why wouldn't I bid them right away, instead of allowing opps to negotiate their defense? It's important for partner to know that 2♠ means precisely a reserve in length, not in HCP. My regular partners do. I would bid the same way even at IMPs, but only NV.

Unfav, IMPs. You have agreed on 2/1. You deal and open 1♣. LHO intervenes with 1♥, and your partned bids 2♦. How much force has his bid? Let's say RHO passes, you now bid 2NT, LHO passes, and partner raises to 3♦. What does this look like - sign off, invitation or forcing to game?

There must be a catch here, but I am not able to see it. Stayman, then either 6M or 6NT. I won't fret much if we'd missed a grand.

You guys vote or only reply? I voted for pass, yet there are only 2 votes for pass.

I have kibitzed on BBO with Asus Eee 1000H, and played against Bridge Baron as well. Afaik, Dell have a 12" netbook. Should be even better.

I voted for 4♠ but after seeing the other votes I realized I made a mistake, and 4♣ (cue) is the right bid as we are a trick better than if we were 4=2=2=5 or 4=1=3=5 with the same strength.

I don't think 4♠ is weaker than 4♦. 4♠ should deny a small singleton, typically 19 balanced or equivalent with a 4522 or a stiff honor. I think if it isn't it should be. 4♠ just closes the bidding whereas 4♦ is a clear slam invitation with a ♠ fit. You could bid 4♠ even with minimum points: ♠KQxx-♥Axxxxx-♦void-♣Axx. When you're limited it doesn't make sense to invite even with a shortness. Your partner can still investigate further with their own extras.

Oops, sry B) It looked like there were too many points all around. :)

Is it forbidden to pass with this hand, or am I scared the 1♣ redouble will be passed by everyone?

2♣ can't be the same as if RHO has passed if rdbl shows 10+ HCP, because with a passed RHO 2♣ is FG with any type of hand, and now opps clearly have the better part of the deck. I like what manudude03 said: both majors although with 5/5 I could even be without high cards.

3♠ has no alternative. I could have more controls with these points only with a ♦ void. If we have a ♥ fit, hearts will be our source of side tricks. If not, there will be a ♥/minor crossruff. ♠AKxx ♥Axxxxx ♦x ♣Ax would be 4♠ ♠AKxx ♥AKxxxx ♦x ♣Ax would be 4♦

Turn ♠Ace into Queen, and I bid 3♠. Turn it into x, and I pass.

Sorry, misread the bidding.

The main risk of preempting isn't that partner will overcompete. The risks are that: - You are already too high and get caught. - You tell them how to make a contract that would otherwise have gone down. - You encourage them to play in a making 3NT instead of a non-making suit contract. The difference between balancing and third seat preempting is that you are pretty much obliged to balance, whereas preempting is more a matter of personal choice and evaluation. That said, I am on Winston's side here. Competent opponents are certain to get to their best contract when we don't intervene. Taking away valuable bidding space from them decreases their chances significantly. It is true that I may help the declarer but more often my bid serves to guide partner not to blow a trick on the lead. Furthermore, since partner is a passed hand my strength can vary very much, up to an opening hand, so the declarer can still use only the distribution info, and even that is not certain, because I could even have a side 4CM which I wouldn't have in first seat. You could go for a number, but percentagewise your distribution practically compels you to preempt.