dsLawsd

I might bid Gerber (an Ace Ask alone) then decide what next. Alternate would be to transfer, then bid 4 showing a mild slam try. 3rd choice bid 4NT slam invite and let partner decide if max. Desperate for a swing just bid 6? Fun hand.

The system should dictate the response over 2♦. If 2NT does not show 15+-17, that is my choice looking at Kx in clubs and a spade stopper. I chose 2♠ in that instance. 3NT figures to be the best spot when E has no extras. But 1♦ - 3NT puts a lot of pressure on the opening leader. How lucky have you been this session?

This auction depends on the skill of the opponents, the state of the score, dinner, drink, and at rubber bridge the amount of coin of the realm. South has the safety of a good suit, so do what you want. The Bridge World used to have the feature You Be the Judge where entrants chose the worst action and assigned fault in per cent. Here, I think the single worst bid was the Takeout Double at rubber, but every other bid was also a fault. North should show a limit raise and let partner captain the auction. East should pass 4 hearts or if rich double (sort of responsive?). The final double has merit if you are rich or have other info about the opposition. But wonderful defense!!

I would say that Walsh style 2/1 that 3♣ shows 5-4+ with a good 15 count. With less 2NT would show 5-4-2-2 or 5-3-3-2. It could be stronger. Bridge World Standard would likely consider that sequence to show at least 16 with good suits or 5 clubs. Getting to the 3 level when 2♦ is not an absolute game force requires extras forcing to at least 4 of a minor when a fit is not found and 3NT not in the picture.

With such great trumps she should think about slam. Have her give partner a perfect minimum here with Axxxx xx Axx KQx and that would likely yield 12 tricks. With no other tools, bid regular Blackwood and on the actual hand she can count the tricks. Maybe the response will inspire her to bid 5 NT. Soon you can help her build a better bidding system. I would bid Jacoby 2NT because I am stronger than 15 HCP. But a splinter would be used by many.

GIB is not that bad and sometimes impressively accurate. But if I had to improve the program I would first have opening leader pick partner's suit with support especially at a suit contract. I do not know how to train a robot to not bid one more when competition only is in order, but perhaps the simulation being made by the software could be tinkered with to settle for a pass.

Everyone gets a shot on this one. After 1♥ Pass 1♠ 1 NT seems right but with some partners 2♣ might show a pretty decent hand. But after the double advancer should bid 3♦ showing a good suit and interest whether intervenor has a minor suit hand or quite likely a hand too strong for 1 NT. As for North-South 1♠ does not appeal- either 2♠ or pass seems better. But on the actual auction North should raise to 2♠ mostly to show 3 and clog the auction. Support double might be possible but do you really want to encourage partner that much yet? You pays your money and takes your chances.

A fascinating hand showing that matchpoints is a unique game. 1♥seems rather normal as the field figures not to pass. I think that I would open 1♣ as I have an answer for each and every likely followup! on the actual 2♥ opener try bidding 3♠ not 3 hearts? After all you do have a likely 10 card fit. A simulation program would be interesting to run.

I totally agree with your analysis and line of play.

Me also. But I allow partner to bid other than 3 Clubs with the "right hand" (needs a firm agreement). On this specific auction, I would use Max Hardy's method which is to double showing a 2 NT raise = 8or 9 HCP. I also like 2 diamonds weak, but not in first seat. Too much in other suits to "suit" me... Rubensohl may be the right thing to evolve into??

Those are the choices. So who are your opponents and what event are you in? Whatever I do will be wrong a fair per cent of the time, so what is my best chance to max my score? I think 3♦, the slight overbid is the best since we can still stop in 4, bid 5 or if partner has the right hand 3 NT. But my style is to overbid a little which partner knows. Naturally if we have a very good score I might just go with 2 NT. Partner still has a choice to not bid 3♣ in some cases.

I will just add: when you respond visualize in advance what may happen on the Next round. When on the bubble between game force and invitation make the auction flow for your partnership. Better to find the right denomination even if a level too high. Of course the type of event will often dictate your strategy. Matchpoints may dictate an underbid subject to correction. In this case bid spades only when better than hearts or some other place. Some play that 1♠ denies 4 spades or that 1♠shows 5 and 1 NT possibly four. K-S players have a good discussion about some of the above. The system is listed on the web pages of The Bridge World.

Very fun stuff where agreements need to be formed before now to have the best auction. I am still famous in Phoenix for bidding slam in my void= it was the only one that made. Here, I might consider the same or I might bid 5♦ which cannot be natural and let partner field it. He looking at his cards will almost always make an accurate assessment (or be fired!) Ha Ha. 5NT pick a slam has much to recommend it also in a finely tuned partnership.

Tragically funny! The usual secret at IMP Pairs is to defend for your life. But total points seems to skew things too much against accurate bidding opponents. That situation seems to argue for using some kind of Howell movement to keep the pairs moving. Some software somewhere should analyze this further! And may 2020 bring you better hands or "worser" opponents!!

AWM has it right. With some partners I might NOT make a support double as partner should field my hand as holding spades. Matchpoints is the very definition of bad bridge- but so very stimulating. With a good hand with hearts, partner would often try 2 hearts.

Practice is the key. Reading Watson's Play of the Hand followed by more advanced books can help. But really, it is visualization that makes it happen. Marshall Miles book All 52 Cards opened that area up for me. And there are other books similar that are more recent. Lastly, Rodwell's Book The Rodwell Files can dramatically improve most peoples game and is amazing. Work, work, work! You will get there!

Unlucky- but a pass seems better. Unless you feel like psyching a 1NT call you are going to be at the mercy of the field. Personally I would want to be in a spade partial unless I suspect partner has a 5 card suit. The Dia K is not pulling much weight. If the spade T is triple then 4♠ can go down on a later upper cut. Of course, if S correctly bids 2♠ then game sounds good- above 50%. But a spade part score with superior declarer play rates to score 60% in a good field. A wonderful matchpoint problem kind sir!

It seems related to a Backwash Squeeze too- quite interesting and reinforces the idea Not to double and give away too much info. +100 or _50 are about the same without a huge trump stack. But it would be informative if we had the actual auction. DAVE ###$

IMHO you should have bid 2♠! partner should figure it out. If the suit was hearts partner will make a continuation (you need some agreements here) that will allow for a convenient out. Good example hand sir.

Perhaps the example of building a partnership was Eisenberg- Kantar who had system differences that needed agreements. After the game they had great give and take that led to a great partnership. They also had a great temperament to survive bad results without a cross word. I personally watched them during a Quarter of a high level match where they gave up more than 50 IMPs. But you would never know since they acted like they were winning. Best case- mark the hands for discussion later. But it takes 2 to agree to this. Only discuss a system malfunction briefly at the time to correct a matter that might come up again. I have had only about 3 partners over 40 years that could master this...

yes- they use GIB 2/1- the system is available in the notes on robots. The popups occur when you mouse over the bid- otherwise should not be seen.

This problem might occur in any system it seems to me although some forcing club systems might not. Bidding 2 NT after the transfer is probably the most standard approach since game is not odds on without a max NT opener or a very decent spade fit. The state of the score and the scoring method certainly matter of course. Good question.

You tricky fellow- bidding as if you had spade control which put the opening leader under the delusion that a passive lead was the best hope here. And perhaps hoping that you would somehow win a heart trick too. Otherwise, even against NT it is often best to lead a card closest to winning a trick- here the ♠K!!

Probably correct. I have seen some sign-on issues when the huge weekend events are on (with some 20K participants)- perhaps having a different provider or an alternate might help

I like the Swedish style but I like 2 NT to be a bit stronger with limit raises showing 4 trumps and a singleton. I am not sure I want to waste 3M and 3 NT in your structure due to thinking the frequency is too low to be useful. Brogeland has recommended using 4 level bids to show shortness by opener so it might be useful to read his examples and see how your ideas would work in that version. Nice work here.