Siegmund

In SA I would assume 2NT = 16+ to 18-, jump to 3NT with the best 18s and almost all the 19s, along with a few weaker hands with running diamond suits (i.e., "to play.") I can imagine that some people always rebid 2M with their 4252 17-counts, but not my style of SA.

It is standard that if the opponents appear to have more than one possible strain to play in, you only double them for penalty if you expect to be able to inflict a similar-sized set if they run to their other playable spot. The question here is whether you believe that these are auctions where you expect that for the opponents. After 2H-P-3NT presumably we either are preventing hearts from running, or we "knew" that responder had a long minor and we have that stopped. I think the rule does apply here - sort of - inasmuch as we'll be very surprised to see 4H make, though it's certainly possible we will get only 100 or 300 against 4HX instead of making game our way if 3NT was a psych. In the latter auction, we essentially never expect 1SX to be the final contract, whether responder psyched or not, so I don't think the usual "after a penalty double" rules apply at all.

Unlucky, on this hand, that you weren't playing a 16-19 range for 2NT. It's true you're expecting 6 of the missing points to be in spades where you will have no losers, if you trust this South not to open a 5-card weak two in third seat.But you DID ask for a lot from your passed-hand partner for slam (even if he has two aces, losing a heart and a club, or two hearts, is possible.) In the greater scheme of things I'd call this just a slight misjudgment and blame it on the stomach flu, not a horrendous error.

No (though on the hands strong enough to compete to the 5-level on their own, especially with a possible 2nd defensive trick, 1H then 4 or 5 on the next round would cross my mind.) But at favorable my 4H jumps are going to vastly more often be 3-7-1-2 with HAQ and nothing else, or A9xxxxx in hearts and a stray king somewhere, or Q-8th and another face card. What I said was that the posted example with AQ-8th and the CK was at least 1 1/2 tricks stronger than typical, partner knows I am going to bid on the assumption he has 6 or 6 1/2 tricks, and IF he chooses to bid 4H with an 8-trick hand he has taken a calculated risk that he will cause us to miss a slam by doing it. Without doing a sim, I expect partner to have an 8-card heart suit maybe 25% of the time (and most of those without the CK.)

I rated it int-adv rather than plain intermediate -- it IS challenging material, the type of material advanced players should get right and intermediates don't think about. You could almost take the material in this book as what separates int from adv in cardplay. Most intermediates are struggling with more basic aspects of planning the play but will still benefit from reading some of the easier sections of the book, and come back to it as they improve. This and the card combinations book are the two best of the whole Lawrence bookshelf. Unlike barmar I dislike most of Lawrence on bidding, but I happily recommend these two.

I've not read that much of the updated Lawrence. Hmmm. Wonder what he updated, if he didn't include any fit-jumps or anything.... I do think that (1c) 1h (1s) 2s natural - in the "I want to play spades" sense anyway - is strange. If I wanted a to-play bid in either clubs or spades I'd prefer to have it be in clubs. That said, it's true that you do have an "extra" cuebid available. After (1c) 1h (1s), you have 2C, and 2S, and 3C, all available to define as you choose. The obvious meanings are limit+ for one and mixed raise for another, but a use for the third is perhaps not so obvious. With my regular p, our agreement is 2C=limit+, while 2S=mixed raise, better spades than clubs, and 3C=mixed raise, better clubs than spades, so that when they compete at the 3-level, partner will have a feel for whether my values are more offensive or defensive. I don't consider that a standard treatment at all; it was just something we tried and liked. I would think 2S=mixed raise, 3C=fit-jump is more normal. Re fit-jumps in general... many North American experts play them, but they are a well kept secret (sort of like the Obvious Shift Principle before Granovetter's book came out) -- completely absent from the intermediate-to-advanced bidding books (except for a few oblique references to passed-hand jump shift responses implying a fit), and very rarely featured in Bulletin or bridge-column hands. Many if not most intermediate players have never heard of them. Robson and Segal's book never achieved a wide circulation in the US in the mid 90s, and was unavailable at any price here for several years (ca. 2000 until it became available as an internet download.) Edited to add: IMO it's a bidding-question thread not a book review thread and I wouldnt move it, but up to the mods to decide.

Not a forcing pass for either side IMO though I can imagine opener's side having a special agreement about auctions like this. @rduran: if partner has 1½ or 2 tricks more than he showed and we miss slam as a result, that's on his head, not mine. My partners arent "very likely" to do that to me, though it's not impossible for a leap to 4H to be a bit heavy from time to time.

Blast. I blast this hand NV or at MP too. As already said... there is NO way partner's going to place you with this much if you only invite.

Safe heart here. The spade seems like a very long shot indeed; I might even rate it slightly behind the club, especially if declarer is the sort of person who jumps to 2NT with any balanced 18 even if it includes 4 spades.

A matchpoint maven might refuse to lead away from AJxx even if that was the best chance of setting the contract, not the other way round. (For instance make the your hand Txxx Tx AJxx T9x and you'd get votes for the club lead.) Edited to add: see Hanoi's lead thread today for another example of avoiding an otherwise appealing AJxx.

As long as you have plenty of entries, yes, for most of the same reasons 4-4 is better than 5-3: the unevenly divided side suit provides more pitches, and a dummy reversal might be possible with the evenly divided trump suit. If it's a choice between 5-3 and 7-1, you may have to pick the 7-1 for fear of being unable to reach the 7 once it's established if you run out of trumps in that hand.

I will stick with the "giant-DUH answer:" my impression is that in general LTC is as good for slams as for games (which is to say, shaky if you use the losers+losers method, and remarkably good if counting losers-covers.) It does quite a lot less well at the partscore level, because the holdings it has trouble evaluating are the weak ones (treating Qxx opp xxx and Axx opp JTx the same) that occur frequently on 20-point deals and much less frequently on 30-point deals.

I would hope that after the director had all the facts, he didn't just say "play on", but gave the UI-users an explanation of what they'd done / warning about it. Part of his job is making the offenders less likely to offend again in the future. Given they already have a bad result, I wouldn't expect anything further to be done unless they already were habitual offenders (and directors usually know who those are a lot better than the recorder does.)

What's correct is you and your partner giving the same answer to the question. :) There is IMO a clear right answer in an auction where GF is established but suit isnt yet agreed (e.g. after 1N-2D-2H-3D, 4C should clearly cue for diamonds while 3H sets trumps as hearts and tells partner to start cuebidding) but 1H-1S-2S-3H-3S doesn't do that. Getting back to the actual hand, some people put a lot of effort into making choice-of-games auctions available. That's not a bad thing in an established semi-expert partnership. But in a newish or less regular partnership I am a big believer in "if a major has been bid and raised, it is trumps, all further discussion is only about how high we're going." If a minor has been bid and raised, the space between 3m and 3NT is still available to discuss notrump or make a delayed raise of a major (1H-2D-3D-3H = hearts are trump; 1H-2D-3D-3S = if we're going to have a trump suit it is going to be spades, but 3NT may still be the final contract). Not optimal in the world championship I am sure but it guarantees no expensive accidents. It's the style I would assume is in effect with a pickup partner, and even with a regular partner unless and until we've specifically discussed which auctions are COG. As an extra bonus, if we have a choice we'll take the 4-4 fit over the 5-3 fit (and 1H-1S-2S often is a 4-4 fit in spades while hearts never is), so in this particular auction, always picking spades is going to be right more often than not.

Pass and not close sounds right to me. What if you're not playing Puppet? That makes a REALLY interesting question. Over 1NT with a weak 3-3-6-1 Stayman is still a really big winner; I wouldn't be surprised if this is the right time for a 4-3 fit even over 2NT. I'd gamble on it (and apparently land in 3M on the actual cards.)

At the table at MPs a quiet 3NT with an overtrick or two is very tempting. Those of us who don't play 2H artificial (and whose partners are likely to still have 3 spades) may lean toward 3C as the safer lie to tell, trying to extract information about spade support from partner or get NT played from his side if he has Qxx(x) in hearts. The thread does raise a good point that many hands where opener would raise 2H are hands that will play well in a diamond slam. The 2H bid has more merit than I thought it did when I first opened the thread. Not quite enough to make me a believer yet, but almost. Challenging hand to evaluate, even with the bidding so low.

There is plenty of B. All to West!

I'll bid 5H and expect it to make more often than not thanks to the club shortness (and of course will punish them if they push on to 6D, as long as that won't ask partner to lead a club.)

Looks like a normal auction to me. As South I'd feel I had underbid slightly with only-2-spades. I suppose 3H by North at second turn is legally an option -- ostensibly a game try in spades asking about heart quality but implying a double fit to give South a choice of games -- but I wouldnt bother, slam looking like it's completely out of the question from where North sits, and it probably carries a lot more risk of getting dumped in 3H if South has a minimum and thinks he has been offered a choice of partscores than it has chance of uncovering a surprise cuebid from South. (Bonus question: if it does go 1H-1S-2S-3H-4C, which suit did we agree as trumps? Or do you play a six-ace version of Blackwood in this type of auction?) Did you have a particular question about the hand, jilly? (If you also had a 3-card GF raise like 1H-pass-3NT available, I would have started with 1S anyway without both minors stopped.)

As mike mentioned, many people play strong jump overcalls in the passout seat, and if so this hand is plenty good enough for 2H. If for some reason that's not an option for you, under the "add a king in balancing seat" rule of thumb I'd call this hand quite a bit too good for 1H and start with X (following with 3H over 2S, which partner ought to take as forcing).

Well, you already know you need to sort out your agreements so we won't repeat that. I can think of two other comments to make, though they really are sub-comments to sorting out your agreements: Do you really believe that "we are playing kickback" means "4♥ should be kb for ♦ and 4♠ kb for ♥"? I suppose it's a possible agreement. It's not what I would assume if I had agreed kickback without any extra bells and whistles (do you have a meta-agreement to have two ace-asking bids in a variety of other auctions where trumps are not yet clearly set?) and I am not sure you'll find very many people willing to give up a natural 4M bid here. Even if I had agreed Kickback with someone, and I knew 4D was natural, I would assume 4M natural and 4N asking for diamonds in this particular auction (and been sure enough of it to answer 1 keycard as South.) Re 4NT, agreeing to play it natural in this type of auction does have merit at matchpoints, but in most kickback auctions (with one trump suit) I'd assume 4NT is a cuebid of the trump+1 suit, swapping it with the kickback call. With my regular p, incidentally, 4D would be a cuebid for hearts, not natural - but absent discussion I would indeed expect 4D to show a hand like the one you held.

Some of us vote with our feet, and never enter the tourneys that ban psyching. (And, frankly, have a somewhat low opinion of BBO allowing rules contrary to the laws in some tournaments -- though since there are goulashes etc offered too, there is precedent for allowing "non-bridge" tournaments here.) Of course, the people who enter those tourneys are probably glad that we psychers are out of their hair. heh.

I should add that I was not expecting extras nor 5-5 from partner (in fact if pressed I would name 5242 and 5341 as the most likely distributions.) I am still too old-fashioned for it to cross my mind that partner would double 2H without a trick in hearts that he'll probably never have. Perhaps the fact that partner failed to bid a westerncueish 3H should convince me he is strongly enough suit-oriented that we always belong in diamonds. I was thinking more of the fact some of partner's slamgoing monsters might cuebid, and that I had two heart stoppers so hands where partner passed up a chance to find 3NT if I had one stopper might still belong in notrump (mostly hands where partner turns up with Kx in clubs or something, for 3N to beat 5m.) Wish I knew just how partner decided between 3D and 3H!

MP or wIMP? Ugly either way, knowing all my values are in the wrong places except that DK. I am fine with 3NT to hope for a plus and to cool down partner.(But at imps on this forum, I expect to be in a minority, somehow.)

If your style allows you to ever raise on 3-card support, that's just about the perfect hand for it.