Double !

since I don't know what I'm doing tonight, I'll make a fool of self and try this one. I might just try another ♥/ safe if P started with Q-10 tight, should be OK and take P off endplay if P has AQ10 of hearts. can't P be QJ4th, AQ10, xx, xxxx? or something like that. Like I said, brain is slowly deteriorating. Probably see errors of this reasoning after some sleep.

Chapter 1: Playing on an Assumption All 52 Cards, by Marshall Miles one of the best card play books ever written ps: I think it's chapter 1

assuming not playing thrump dbl's double is OK in 13-16 NT system because P will either have 5+ clubs, 4441, or extra values. just another example of why I dislike strong NTs

CAVEAT EMPTOR You may take any and all of the inferences from the opps hesitations you want, at your own risk. Hesitator's partner may not. Don't know what the acbl tournament procedural norm currently is regarding calling director when there is a break in tempo. Way back when our approach used to be to call director immediately---the chicken soup convention/ "it couldn't hurt".

OK, at rubber bridge or IMPs (or imps?) the spade switch was a reasonable 2-way shot to try to defeat the contract, basically if not "x", then "y". Question/ what about the "real world" of MATCHPOINTS? Is the low spade switch the percentage defense playing matchpoints? Perhaps one question is, "can declarer have an 8-count including both major-suit kings and still rebid only 2NT over the "reverse?" Do we defend Passively or Actively on this hand? Was the bidding and final contract seemingly somewhat normal, whatever normal is?. (I am not convinced that they were.) Is it being declared from the right side? Did I find a good opening lead or my typical trick out the window opening lead? Anyway, your play, trick 3, matchpoints. :)

weak 2, but truth be told, like neither. has someone been reading the "eric rodwell interview"?

Ouch! That was cold!

Splinters: opening hand, usually 4441 Helps stay out of 3NT with x opposite something like Jxx in a suit. So obsolete, but simple and effective another possibility is 3M as pre-empt, and 3D as "flat stayman", stayman with flat hand.

I disagree with the 3♠ bid, especially if the partnership is unestablished. I would have passed over 3♥. This gives partner more room to show his/her hand. P might have bid 3♠/ 3♥. The bidding for the partnership went too fast. Pass 5♣.

I wish to thank all respondents so far. I agree that Pass at matchpoints rates to be the percentage bid, and that Vul, at imps, there might be more to consider. The underlying theme of this posting was only partly related to the hand in question, but raised the issue of the following. (I hope I am able to express the question as intended.) When partner competes/ takes direct action over an opp's 2 or 3-bid, To what degree is partner taking action based solely on his/her hand, and what assumptions is partner making about your hand/ is partner assuming that you have X amount of values and is partly including these values when deciding whether or not to take action? For example. one suggestion that was made to me a long, long time ago was to assume that partner had about 6 points when taking direct action (and that partner should then deduct about 6 pts from his/her hand before deciding whether or not to bid or how much to bid. (In balancing seat, assume partner has about 9 pts. etc., etc.) So, the question becomes, in terms of the sample hand posted, how much of that hand did partner assume or already bid when partner overcalled 3H? Do you really have much more than partner already assumed? Another approach to this situation might be to say, Partner contracted for 9 tricks, how many more might my hand be worth? In other words, to NOT base the decision to respond or not to respond on the premise that partner presumed certain values in your hand when partner bid 3H. I hope I've presented the question clearly. Because it leads to the following: you hold something like ♠xxxx, ♥xxxx, ♦ Kxx, ♣ Ax matchpoints, last round of 2-session stratified pairs, flight X, you are definitely in contention but you don't know whether you are 1st, 2nd, etc. at this point. neither vul: rho passes, you pass, lho bids 3 clubs, partner bids 3 diamonds, and rho passes, YER BID (3NT anyone? Are these the perfect cards even though P might have presumed some values when bidding 3 diaminds?)

Both sides are RED You hold: ♠ xx ♥ Jx ♦ 97xx ♣ KQJ9x Lho opens 2♠: weak 2 bid Partner bids 3♥ rho passes. YER BID! 1) at IMPS 2) at matchpoints thank you in advance

AMAZING One of the finest players and an excellent bridge author suggesting that one bid one's hand naturally. And agreeing with another of the finest. Will wonders never cease? Thank you for the post, Roland.

SUPER Fantastic Excellent and Well Done

I suggest that one read the Eric Rodwell Interview posted at the Bridge Matters web page, particularly with regards to signalling. IMO, pick the method that you are most comfortable with (that comes most naturally or instinctively to you) and go from there. More importantly: COUNT! like, count to 13!!!!!

at imps = 3♥ at mp? probably pass and (hopefully) take a plus score. After all, partner didn't rebid 3♥ to show near max 5-5 or better. Wish the KJ of clubs were the ace instead. Then would risk a raise.

Pass unless partner and I have discussed meaning of double. The bidding on the surface seems to call for a major suit lead (no stayman). Assuming (always a risk) that the bidding has been similar at other tables, I don't wish to risk a bottom (or even more imps) my hitting the contract and having it wrapped around my neck when partner doesn't know what to lead and they run 9+ tricks off the top (dummy rates to have a number of clubs). And if partner actually wins a trick, there's always a second chance for a diamond shift, especially if a signal has been available. If playing with my 1 F2F partner, I have nothing to worry about: he always leads diamonds anyway (lolololol--it's a long story)

7 shovels ♠ Partner seems to be concerned only about trump losers. I'll pay to a bad spade break (again)

2NT or Pass ( a very close 2nd choice) Failure of partner to make negative double is an important consideration, but partner may not have a good enough hand to commit partnership to the 3-level opposite a minimum opener. I never bid enough, so this time I'll be aggressive. Minor suit T and J could be important cards. If partner has a blizzard, so I lose a few imps versus losing chance for a vulnerable game. And if I'm down a truckload, well, there's always next hand.

Call 911 ! Ok, I pass. I have no clear action, no fit, passing may be only way for plus score, and I have a great partner whom I trust completely, without reservation. He will know the right thing to do in the balancing seat.

So, now the partnership is in a forcing situation following the 3C bid? Maybe it's time to show your heart support like with a bid of 3 hearts? Partner heard your negative double (takeout dbl) and should have some idea of what to do next.

6-suited decks of cards do exist. The additional two suits are Wheels and Rackets.

5 diamonds would be off 3 aces with my luck, hand might well belong in 3NT

AHA It means you need some psychoanalysis in order to help you understand the meanings of all of those various symbols that were posted, phallic, oedipal, (puppy feet, jewels like diamonds, shovels, hearts, etc. etc.), and in-depth exploration of defenses and early-childhood cathexes and fixations. Office hours have been extended for weary BBO Forum members. Verrry Interesting!

It VERY MUCH matters who my partner is, what our response structure is, and what else we are playing such as system. When in doubt (advocates of pressure bidding forgive me) I tend to be disciplined in order to enable partner to attempt to make intelligent relatively informed decision should he decide to take action. So, My vote has to be OTHER

GOooooooooooooooooooo TEAM FIGHT RAH!