dokoko

Clustering responder's hands should depend on what is known about opener's hand. Opposite a standardish 1♠ opener it makes a great difference whether responder has 2 or 3 spades; if he has 3 or more spades it's not that important whether he has 3 or 6 diamonds.

Could you give a list of responses to your one-level openings?

We play: 2N = "Blackout" aka Ingberman (weak hand) or nat FG 3♣ = nat FG 3♦ = artificial game force, no good descriptive bid (often 5 hearts) 3♥ = FG 6+ hearts 3♠ = FG spade fit 3N = nat, 11-13 pts, usually not 5 hearts 4♣ = Picture Bid, concentrated 2=5=2=4 4♦ = splinter with a spade fit 4♥ = semisolid suit, no diamond control, nonforcing 4♠ = Picture Bid, concentrated 4=5=2=2 4N = nat, 13+-15 pts, solid diamond stop When opener reverses above responder's suit, responder's "Blackout" bid may include weak hands with extra length.

Last time is two weeks ago. 2!Dx went for 800 at imps. In the old days people had good hands with good suits for a voluntary rebid. Nowadays with nobody doubling them, they just show distribution.

Usually there are some practical aspects to consider. If you reduce a hand at the table to some theoretical question you will often miss something. - Here if you have reason to assume hearts are 4-4, the finesse is safe as you will still win if it loses. - If clubs don't break you will need the finesse anyway (as long as you don't play for spades and hearts breaking evenly). - If you assume hearts are 5-3, a finesse into the danger hand is risky but usually odds on, while a finesse the other way is safe. - You may try to drop ♦Q. While this isn't very likely to materialize, it's still a possibility. - Instead of a finesse into the danger hand, you might try to duck a spade into the safe hand. For this you should be pretty sure that hearts are 5-3. So usually there are more than two options ("finesse" or "don't") and the right play depends on what you think is appropriate on the actual deal. In general, if the contract at the other table is likely to be the same - as well as the lead, from the two most promising lines you should choose the one that beats the other more often; if it's a tie choose the safer one. If you are in an unusual situation, try to figure out what might be happening at the other table. If you are in an inferior contract, play for some layout where you can beat the normal contract.

If you open Multi with 5 and 6 card suits you may like this: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U5PsXQzlUGEvHa7Iet44_CVpNAOFcwIT2W_MqMadpAU/edit

After your free 3♦ bid partner has a penalty double of 3♥. As to the defense, you should overtake ♦K and switch to ♠K. You don't have a vulnerable holding in either of the pointed suits, so instead of signaling and hope partner understands you should take over. If you get both of those right, you will be rewarded by 300.

(1♣) p (1♠) 2NT (p) 3♦ (3♠) 4♦ (4♠) 5♦ (p) p (dbl)

Does your improver (in principle) know that a 2NT bid would show a two-suited hand? If yes you should bid it - even if she might get it wrong. How is she going to improve if she gets no opportunities to handle such situations?

I would think that some stats, such as - percentage of invites accepted - percentage of games made - percentage of partscores making enough tricks for game - percentage of enemy partscores going down and the like might help to analyze your general approach.

What is your point? What are you trying to achieve?

Those who include strong balanced hands in a multi opening usually have at least 3 buckets: 1st: open 2NT 2nd: open 2♣, rebid 2NT 3rd: open 2♦, rebid 2NT Of these buckets the first should contain the weakest range and the 3rd should contain the strongest range. This is because the bidding preceding the 2NT bid may damage the follow-up after 2NT (and in some cases responder even has reason to bid above 2NT immediately). So with the most common range (the weakest) you should avoid these complications and with the rarest range you accept that these complications exist; usually the stronger the hand the better you can handle them.

As long as your response structure does not rely on the fact that opener promises a second suit, I think you can call your Wilkosz Multi and use it. But if you bid 2♠ on Kxx-xx-Qxxx-Axxx you obviously rely on the fact that opener promised a second suit if his long suit is hearts. In that case I would rule you are not playing Multi. Personally I think from a certain level, there should be no (or very few) restrictions. OTOH players participating in big tournaments should be obligated to publish their convention cards in advance. That way others could prepare defenses to unusual conventions.

In a game with incomplete information you probably need a delay if players are able to connect to the "life broadcast". The delay might even be necessary in a chess game with "slower" time control. If instant engine evaluation is available on the broadcast, watching the broadcast may help an active player (if evaluation suddenly goes up, you can conclude that there is some winning combination).

That's why I would double in the South seat. Being a passed hand, partner will not play me for more. I agree double is risky, but pass is risky, too. In my world the hand short in opp's suit should act.

This is a standard NT response in most natural systems. Technically you suggest 1NT as final contract but partner is expected to bid if he is strong or unbalanced or both. Here East would have bid 2♥ without the overcall. While it is unusual to have two long minors, one long minor of 6 or 7 cards is not that rare. It's just impractical to bid a long minor with such a low point count and then convince partner that you are much weaker than he expects.

The normal plan for declarer is: win T1 with a top club, discard a diamond on the other top club, then play on trumps to make 9 tricks - regardless of your defense. If he won the first trick with the jack (unlikely) he should have made 10 tricks by discarding both diamonds immediately on the top clubs. I guess he took a top club at the start and now your partner could have helped you with a trump signal. Back in the old days the so-called trump echo (hi-lo in trumps) showed a 3rd trump and a desire to ruff. If you had that agreement, partner could tell you by following upwards that he cannot ruff. Playing that way you would go for your side-suit winners thereby holding declarer to 8 tricks.

Douglas' line seems best - except for cashing ♠A early (retaining it may help if you switch to some other line). So: ♠ ruff, ♥A, ♥ ruff and only now (if nothing unusual has happened) cash ♠A and follow Douglas' line. You need West to have started with 2 or 3 diamonds and 3 or 4 hearts. The alternative line of using the diamond entries first needs West to have started with exactly 3 hearts and 2, 3 or 4 diamonds. If West plays ♥K on the second round, you have to reconsider. Probably best then to run ♣10 at trick 4 and later give up a trick to ♥J. This will succeed if clubs are 3-2 (and you guess right if West started with KJ or Jx). You may play on similar lines if West plays ♥J on the second round but it's less clear in that case. Note: West might trick you by playing ♥K at trick 3 from ♥KJxx, but I am willing to pay off to that. If West plays both honors to the first two heart tricks, you should probably come to hand with a club to the ace and run heart winners through West.

If East leads ♦A (quite normal IMO) and continues with ♥Q (also quite normal) or a small spade, the contract should go down. As often, the board wasn't lost in the bidding but in the play (here: defense).

If North agrees that the South hand is "strong" in their methods, they should modify their explanation. Otherwise everything is ok and South just misbid.

Think of such combinations in the following way. You try to win as many tricks in 3 rounds as possible. Depending on what happens on those tricks your 4th card in dummy will be a winner or not. If you finesse the 10 then the Q you make 3 out of 3 if KJ is onside and 2 out of 3 if either K or J is onside but not both. If you start finessing the 8 you cannot improve on that but lose an extra trick when your 8 loses to the 9 and the J would have been onside. You don't plan to take three finesses in the suit, as you may finish getting no heart trick at all. So the ♥8 is what is sometimes called a "disturbing card" - you know how to play xxx opposite AQTx, so the fact that dummy's x is the 8 is purely incidental.

king in East = 50% jack in West = 50% low to 10 right play = 100% all together = 26%

unusual agreement IMO - I would take it as nonforcing invite

Looking at it from the other side of your path it seems you want to modify Polish Club by removing several strong hands out of the 1♣ opening thereby making other 1-level openings less well-defined. IMO this will not improve over Polish Club.

I don't think there are more than 12 tricks in either hearts or NT if they lead a spade.