Double !

I do not like pure 100% 2/1 GF, either. I prefer 2/1 GF except for suit rebid. (we also play 2-way jump-shifts: a J-S is either strong, or it is a fit bid. P bids next step to ask which it is. If not 2-way, this bidding dinosaur strongly prefers strong J-Ss. As i have said in the past, there are just certain hands that you need to get off your chest early and then take your time.) This hand is just another example of some structural problems inherent in strong NT systems.

10-4 I agree Someone suggested that the neg X hand might be 1345. If such a hand has some values in diamonds, this hand should not (IMO) make a negative double, but instead should pass. The template distributional pattern for a negX on this sequence is 2434. The farther one deviates from the template, the better the hand needs to be. So, unless P has a 1-suited hand that is not strong enough to bid the suit directly, I think it's reasonable to assume P has 4 hearts (if nothing else, make this a default feature of a negX). It brings to mind an old cartoon that was in some bridge magazine eons ago. Two elderly ladies are sitting at a bridge table. One lady says to the other. "Now remember, Mabel, 4NT is always blackwood!". Now this is not an expert position to take, but there is a message there. Specifically, better to have clear criteria for or meaning of a bid, even if they're poor or less optimal, if it reduces poor results due to misunderstandings.

weak NT actually makes the scheme easier, I suspect. The problem that is causing the complexity is the need to compensate for opener possibly having opened 1m on a balanced minimum.

Sorry, but I can never seem to get my text to come out hidden, but the words double squeeze come to mind.

This is definitely the best answer in the thread... We won't tell your P if you don't. and just deny everything and anything if backed into a corner. the problem is, if it could be less than 4 spades, isn't this alertable at 1-level?

I played precision for a few years eons ago, and I always hated the 2C opening if it could have a 4-card major. System fixes left and right. I recently was able to purchase a used copy of Wei-Anderson's "Matchpoint Precision" book and, so far, I like what I see. Say what you want about adding a 4-2-1-6 hand to the plethora of nebulous 1 diamond openings, but the system eliminates having a 4-card major if you open 2C (also no 4-card major if you open 1NT). I could see the partnership opening 1 diamond on about 10 different type of hands if the stars are properly aligned. But at least you don't have to worry about missing a 4-4 partial at matchpoints.

To the best of my knowledge, this was never really clarified in wei's original book. 2C definitely stayman. Opener could have rebid 3C/1NT to show strong club suit hand. Forget that opener opened 1C. Supposed the bidding went 1NT-2C-2S-4C? what would that mean to you. My guess is that's what it means in the sequence that you just gave. and I haven't been able to find my wei book in decades (or is that decadence?). Just checked out my Goren and my Reese Precision books: neither address the sequence you mention. My guess is that it is Gerber, (or beachnut) ye olde ace-asking bid.

I am glad to see that there is unanimous agreement on 1) what constitutes an inverted single raise, and 2) opener's rebid structure Uh, oh. Sure to get something on this soon in the BPO polls. That should be interesting: wouldn't be able to wait to see how much agreement there is among panelists in terms of opener's rebids. OY

agree with others (for 1st time today) the least lie and most flexible bid would seem to be 1NT The problem with bidding and rebidding and rebidding clubs is that your hand might not provide any other entries, P would play you for better club honors or more potential club tricks in NT, and 3NT would be hopeless.

I learned inverted minors from the Kaplan-Sheinwold system where it was defined as 9+ hcp, at least 4 of minor, no 4-card major (which I have a problem with) and no clear upper limit. But, this was constructed based upon a weak 12-14 NT system where openings of 1m were stronger. Some people I have met play inverted minors as showing a limit raise in the minor and a J-S in the other minor as a forcing raise in the minor. (aka: "criss-cross") I have met/ played with a few who insist that the single raise shows an opening hand. And there are many who reverse the meanings of 3m and 2NT after opps double 1m (example: 1m-X-?) (aka "flip-flop"). I think that it is important to realize that inverted minors were not originally created for 15-17 NT systems, but were adapted to them (and made somewhat awkward). I kept a copy of Fred and Brad's rebid structure: I thought that their responses made a lot of sense. But, playing strong 1NT, do you really need the inverted raise? And (caveat), beware using double raise with 5332 distro. It's usually not a good idea in my experience.

If you TRUST partner, you must pass. with a hand such as void, AK, KTxxxx, AKxxx, does partner really know that he/she has a 12-trick hand at this point? I doubt it, opposite an initially passing partner. AJ5th of trumps and dbltn in his 2nd suit are very strong holdings on such an auction. I need to revalue these cards in conjunction with the bidding. of course, at the table, I wouldn't have the courage of my convictions and would just take what I hope to be a plus score in 6D given the obstructed auction. It's just that my instincts (or instinks) tell me that 7 makes on so many hand provided opps aren't cashing a quick ace (unlikely). And my partner expects me to make these adjustments.

yes i would unless i have GB2NT available (not at the 3-level, unfortunately) or have agreed on some kind of equivalent over opps 3D. Remember, all responder has shown so far was 6+ pts and 4 unknown hearts. If playing dbl of 3D is heart game try, then I would not bid 4C. But, at this point, without the meaning of dbl clearly defined in BBO Adv., I'll bid.

I hope you dentist's manicurist agreed with the dentist's interpretation and re-construction of partner's hand that warranted a 5-heart bid. (I would hate to see the 2 of them "fighting tooth and nail")

I dare to disagree, Luis (especially at matchpoints!) I usually expect partner to have something like KQT5th or 6th, or QJT9xx of convert a 1-level double into penalties. If p has such a hand, I think I have enough controls to defend safely. But, an expert I ain't, so....................

Thanks, Richard I was beginning to feel alone with my 4C bid. You realize, of course, that we'll both be lucky to get more that 50pts for this. Just one question: please explain how partner has shown a weak hand on this bidding? P could've passed 3D and then supported if the heart hand re-opens.

Well, I guess I'm having one of my Oppositional-Defiant-Disorder days or anti-establishment reactions (I was a flower child from the 60s). I would double with this hand first for 3 reasons: 1) I don't want to rule out spades as a viable contract, 2) I think I'm good enough to rebid hearts, 3) and I have support for diamonds which I can always show after bidding hearts if it seems appropriate (which it likely will if partner bids diamonds and then takes another bid after I bid me heart suit. Oh, NO! I just remembered: at my age, I am the so-called establishment. In the 1960's there used to be a slogan that said "never trust anyone over 30". lol: I haven't been able to trust my self for a quarter of a century!!!! It is very difficult to know the best bid over P's 2D forcing response to a 1-H overcall. If I know P promises a rebid, then I rebid my heart suit. Otherwise I cue 3C (implying diamond support) and rebid hearts. Seems most flexible.

OK: Dissenter #1 to speak. I voted for 4 clubs, what I refer to as an "on the way to" bid. A cue bid below 4 of agreed major need not be an out and out slam try. I am just showing the ace on the way to bidding 4 hearts; it costs nothing to make this bid. IMO, failure to do so denies having that card. (Cue bidding below 5m is another story: that should be a slam try.) Partner is, to some degree, the limited hand on this auction and, if the club cue bid doesn't turn him/her on, he/she can use whatever "no interest bid" that he/she has available. (lol: at first glance I thought this hand was intended to see if people considered 3NT by responder as Serious?) My hand is not exactly that awful, even if you make the D-K a small stiff. My point is, 4C does not push the partnership past game, and still leaves me room to make a slam try if I so desire after partner's response.

OY VAY! The answer depends on your partner. Is partner someone who will "borrow" a card from you (assume that he/she may play you to have one key honor) to avoid being pre-empted from slam, or is partner one who doesn't make any such assumption (I prefer the latter). I suspect that partner has a minor suit moose with a likely 12 tricks opposite xxx, xxx in the minors in your hand. Partner didn't bid 5 clubs over 4S; another option to show a good but not super minor suit hand. You have AJxxx of trumps, Jx in partner's other suit (at worst a ruffing value). If playing with a partner that I trust and who trusts me, I would bid 7 diamonds. If it doen't make, then what did partner have to justify 4NT? as usual, wrong again....or am I? DHL

What would you initially respond to 1 heart with ♠ KQJTxxx, ♥ void, ♦ AK, ♣ KQJx? This is the only type of hand that I could conceive of that might create such a bizarre bidding sequence. Told you I has a sick imagination. Hi, no problem for me, since I play strong jumb shifts, i.e. 2S, intending to sell my hand as a strong single suited hand with spades. But even if playing weak jumb shifts, I see no real problem with 1S later jumping to 3S, which should be carrying the same message. And if 3S would not have this meaning I will go via 4th suit. With kind regards Marlowe thank you for your response to this question. :-) I, too, play strong jump-shifts (actually I play 2-way J-S with some P's), but the strong J-S still doesn't solve the problem of how to create an Excl. RKC bid in opener's suit unless using a system of asking bids. I commend all of the other sample hands that people suggested P might have to bid this way. However, in each case it has been shown that P had a much easier way to bid the hand, so IMO, I don;t think one's interpretation of the bid should be based on illogic (that P could have bid this hand differently but didn't). I still don't know what kind of hand would justify creating such a bidding sequence.

I got it from Better Bidding with Bergen (Vol. 1, i think).

Here-in lies one of the problems with bidding polls such as these when viewed as a contest. Credit is given for predicting as much as possible what the majority of the panel will bid and/or say about the hand. Veer to far from that and you lose many points even if your rationale is totally sound or at least makes more sense than the mainstream responses. However, unless I very much misunderstood the reasons for these polls (or "contests"), we are not striving to build the best mouse trap here, but instead trying to establish a wider base of guidelines, commonality or understanding among a greater number of people who will agree to play BBO Basic or Advanced. ( so that there will be fewer gross misunderstandings, frustration, and better results (and happier players :unsure: ). These polls are not to prove one person's approach to be the best mouse trap (although I feel that a truly creative and effective suggestion/ method for handling a difficult bidding situation should be recognizied and reinforced.) It's to increase the level of agreement among the greatest number of players at as high a level of quality as possible. or so I thought probably wrong again,..oh, well (sigh)

Somehow I doubt the validity of this assertion.

Let's hear it for Keycard 4C.! You could also get a sense of the quality of the spade suit by playing ogust or feature-ogust, or disciplined weak 2s where you know opener doesn't have Kxxxxx and a little something outside (as seems to be the trend these days). But that's just what the 4C treatment is for, so you're OK if P opened a less-than-disciplined 2-bid. n.b.: it's also used over opening 3-bids: a nice toy to have available to stop you from getting too high.

it's interesting i am looking at this hand and thinking about the thread on using SA transfers in response to 1m by partner. maybe should fore-go a natural 4C bid and use it as a strong 4H overcall. you don;t need this necessarily if you have spades and opps open 1H (you can bid 4H), but over 1m by opps, the same idea might be worth considering? Yes? / No?