Rebound

With my precision partners, our namyats is defined as an 8-card suit, solid with at least AKQ with at most a K outside. Suit control asking bids are available so voids are fine. As it happens, I've never played the stronger variety and I would be very interested to know the response/rebid structure.

I think the suggested donation scheme, if practicable, might be a good idea. You could even use some of it to tip volunteers with BBO$. I'm all for more vugraph.

1NT. Bidding is supposed to be all about describing your hand. Well I have a stop in the unbid suit so I think I'll let partner know now.

I've lost count of how many times I've seen posts describing this very problem, i.e. players, and more particularly directors, who do not understand this very basic rule of the game regarding calls and their explanations. I just groan every time I see a post like yours, JSilver. Sorry that you, too, have become a victim.

Hmmm looks like down 4 or 5 in 6♠ vs making 6♦. Worth it.

I think I'll put the ♠10 on the table. I'm with Ben as far as not wanting to chance giving up a club trick.

It's really just an extension of RKB where there's a double fit so one more K and Q. According to Eddie Kantar in Roman Keycard Blackwood - Slam Bidding for the 21st Century, the steps are as follows, although, of course, your partnership may have different ideas: 1st step - 1 or 4 (out of 6) 2nd step - 0 or 3 3rd step - 2 w/ neither Q 4th - 2 w/ lower ranking Q 5th - 2 w/ higher Q 6th - 2 w/ both He recommends holding 3 keycards to use RKb in a double agreement sequence due to the large number of responses potentially getting too high otherwise. Note that a cue bid of the second suit does not equal double agreement and applies "only when you support your partner's suit and your partner immediately supports yours...." I just happened to have the book handy so I thought you might find it useful...

The opening lead suggests that one or both missing kings are with west. Perhaps this means the finesse is the right play. I don't know. I like Cherdano's line. It is dangerous to leave the trump out, but it gives an additional chance for the contract. Essentially, it comes down to: if west has a doubleton diamond you are sunk. Otherwise you're all set. Of course, that theory goes down the toilet if there's some reason to believe west has only 2 diamonds.

To me, the fact remains that on this hand South bid game all on his own. In standard methods, I believe this means South expects to make game opposite a bare 6-count (although I have seen pairs on BBO respond with much less). North has as much as 2 kings more than his 1♠ bid has shown. I think North should bid again. I will admit that at the table I would probably just bid 4NT, but I now see the wisdom in bidding 5♣.

I'm with Luke. A-other club. I don't consider it clear-cut. The unbid suit is also appealing, but I want to get rid of trump.

With my regular partner(s) I have been using it a long time and find it's quite handy.

I take a cue from Las Vegas when it comes to percentage plays. They don't always pay off but they keep you in business.

I agree that it comes down to which you deem to be more valuable: on strong hands a SJS makes it much easier to investigate slam, on weak hands a WJS is good way to preempt the opponents and clearly describe your hand. OT: I strongly prefer SJS. To me, WJS is a new idea lol. I've been wondering how long it's been in common use. A great many players I've run into on BBO view it as standard - this took me by surprise, lemme tell ya! So, at the risk of sounding like a dummy, I'd like to ask, when did WJS replace SJS in "standard" bidding?

Well, while I have come to agree that 4♠ is not the bid to make here, with the hand shown I think another bid over 4♠ is a must.

Righto, fair enough.

Firstly, allow me to apologize if I somehow indicated my post was some sort of expert opinion. I merely requested further information as to how 5NT would mean "pick a slam" for my own edification. Secondly, yes, to introduce a new suit at the 4-level on this auction would imply that I can handle partner running back to his suit, at least with the methods normally employed in my regular partnerships. Perhaps this is not the same thing as support, but my intent was the same, hence the word "imply". I fail to understand where "nerve" enters the picture. In fact, I would remind you that my post concluded with, "I am probably totally wrong, but that's likely what I would do at the table." That is, in fact the reason for the post. 4♠ seems like the natural call to me, but it is apparently not correct so I was interested in comments about it. However, I can see I will have to be more careful in the way I express myself if my posts elicit responses like yours.

Conceeding for a sec that I can be pretty dense sometimes, I don't see how 5NT can mean to pick a slam. From what options is partner expected to choose? 4♣ presumably shows a one-suited hand and with both opps bidding hearts, I don't see how your partner would expect you to have a heart stop on the given auction. Please elaborate. For my part, I'm worried about the diamond suit. What to do about that, I don't know. But I think I'd take the pessimistic view and bid 4♠. To me, this implies club support so partner may be able to find another bid. The fact that this doesn't agree with the posts so far shows I am probably totally wrong, but that's likely what I would do at the table.

I agree with Ben. The opponents have no real idea of each other's hands and therefore cannot know if 4♠ is their best spot. But you make it easier on them by bidding 5♦. It reminds me of some advice I once read regarding balancing. One should not do so if the opponents do not have a fit. That would seem to apply here also. Just MHO.

Simply, I always grant undos. I ocasionally request them myself. I spaz out sometimes and click the wrong thing. As someone else said, I would rather win by playing well, not due to a misclick by the opponents. So I would favor the undo feature for ACBL tourneys although I play in them infrequently. That having been said, I am inclined to agree that a tournament is different from playing in the Main Room and merits a certain level of attention such that they probably should not be required on the whole.

I think I'll win the heart ace and play a club. I may get lucky and get another heart lead. Then I can cross-ruff hearts and clubs. More likely, if they return the spade A and another spade, I win in hand and lead the 10 of diamonds. One quick comment, if I may, regarding the bidding. This is just my own opinion, of course, but I really dislike weak jump responses. What I'm wondering is this: when did they become standard bidding practice? Several times now, playing in individuals where we're all supposed to be playing SAYC, I've run into weak jump shifts. As I've said many times, I have a pretty old-fashioned style, nevertheless, I thought strong jump shifts were still the norm. Apparently that has changed somewhere along the line, and I'd be curious to know when :-)

I wish. From the number of times I have seen the same thing happen to me and to those posting here, it's apparent that many td's suffer under the same ignorance regarding the purpose of alerts and explanations. I've also seen the opposite, where opponents change their descriptions of bids to include what they hold rather than providing the agreed meaning. It's rediculous. Where do people learn this stuff? Frankly, it irritates me beyond all reason. Just my 2 cents.

Sorry, I won't bid in this situation at any vulnerability. There's no guarantee at all that LHO has a weakish opener. Further, a 2♥ bid now gives them warning about NT, and finally, I figure my partner for a heart lead against a spade contract anyway. Perhaps if hearts and spades were reversed and the opening bid was 1♥ I might jump in with 2♠, but no bid here. Just my 2 cents.

I guess I'm just not good enough to know the difference. I think the strong club opening is great. And defences to it don't bother me a bit. We have our defences to the defences lol... but we digress... Regarding off-shape NT openings, it strikes me funny that one would express the benefit of opeining NT as often as possible is it gives partner a picture of your shape? Perhaps I misunderstood, but it seems a contradiction that you can get a picture of partner's shape after an off-shape NT opener.

Thanks for the replies. I have given it more thought and now believe the 3♣ bid was an error. I think 1♣ is better, particularly in the unikely event of a diamond response from partner. I would cry all the way to the next hand if we played 3♣ when missing a diamond game or slam. Incidentally, I gave this hand to my brother, the true expert in the family, and he said he would pass, but I think his bidding is somewhat on the eccenrtic side :-)

Sticking to the KISS principle, I take 3♠ here to mean just the opposite. I would say it shows a desire to play 3NT but with a problem in the diamond suit. I.e. my vote was for 3415...