kgr

I was reading the squeeze articles on bridgeguys website and wondered if the Hexagon squeeze is really additional: http://www.bridgeguys.com/squeeze/hexagon_squeeze.html [hv=pc=n&s=h4dAJcA&w=sKhK6dqc&n=sQhAJd7&e=sAhQdK6c]399|300[/hv] South plays ♣A: West cannot discard a ♥ or a ♦; and has to discard ♠K. North can now discard ♥J and East ♥Q. ♥A will squeeze East in ♠ and ♦. So ♥J - and the Hexagon - is unneeded? Or is there another layout for the Hexagon?

I changed bidding on 2 last by adding a 2nd DBL for DBLer

These were the hand and the bidding: [hv=pc=n&s=sj52hajt953dqjt2c&n=sak4hkdak876cq983&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1dp1hp2c(forcing)p3hp3s(4th%20suit%20GF)p4dp4hp6dppp]266|200[/hv] Bidding did get difficult after my 3♥ bid. - 4♥ did sound as a strong hand with ♥-support. So I gambled 6♦, agree? - If I bid 3♦ iso 3♥, should 4♦ by partner be slam interest or re-invite?

I think that partner would take 4♥ as cue in both cases.

When do you bid highest 4c first? [hv=pc=n&s=s5432h5432d5432c2]133|100[/hv] (1♦)-DBL-(Pass)-? (1♦)-DBL-(2♦)-pass (pass)-DBL-(pass)-? (1♦)-DBL-(3♦ weak)-pass (pass)-DBL-(pass)-? Thanks, Koen Edited: Added 2nd DBL on two last after comment of Helene

[hv=pc=n&s=sj52hajt953dqjt2c&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1d(4+)p1hp2c(forcing)p]133|200[/hv] You have the agreement that 2♣ is forcing, but that doesn't matter a lot? - 2♥ is weak (but not very weak because you had weak 2♥,4-7, available in first bid. - 3♦ and 3♥ are invite, - 2♠ is 4th suit GF.

Always interesting to read your play analysis, but I've a question: Why don't you start with ♥Q to protect against any 4-0 break? Is it because you are convinced that LHO started with single ♠?

1N-2D-(DBL) ? Our system: 2♦ is transfer, but can be with 4c♥ if Inv+. We play that pass denies support and anything else is support. 2♥ and RDBL are 3c♥ support; RDBL is nothing to protect (Maybe this will never come up, but that is the agreement we have). Any other bid is 4c♥ support.

Thanks for the reply! The first one was in fact most important for me. Wouldn't it be better then to say that he isn't allowed to run? How can he know if running is best? If he runs with a minimum hand and xx in D and decide to run then maybe responder has ♦AJTxx....not sure, another agreement can: run if you have only a 2-card ♦ (bad luck if responder had really good ♦)? We actually have in our system: "if a transfer is DBL and everybody passes responder can RDBL to have contract played in hand opener."So I should not have this one added For this one we have in fact: "3c support, no desire to play the contract" For this one we have business (but 2C is puppet to 2D for us). Here business should probably be a 4c♣, responder runs if he wants.

After a 1NT opening the Opps DBL a conventional bid and you RDBL. If you play these RDBLs as business, what is the minimum required and is partner allowed to run? RDBL by responder: 1NT-(P)-2C-(P) 2D-(DBL)-RDBL 1NT-(P)-2NT!-(P) 3C!-(DBL)-RDBL 2NT=transfer D 3C=Max for D RDBL by opener: 1NT-(P)-2H-(DBL) RDBL 1NT-(P)-2C-(DBL) RDBL

Thanks all for the answers! I don't know partners exact hand (4cS or 4cD). We both overbid. But I (South) should have stopped looking for slam after the DBL. And should have tried RDBL. S♠ & ♦K were off-site [hv=pc=n&n=skqxxhaxdaxxcktxx&s=s84hkqjt2dqj5caq5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1n(15-17)p2c(puppet%20to%202D)p2d(forced)d2s(5cH%2C%20limit+)p3c(Max%2C%20no%20H-Fit)p4np5cp6nppp]233|200[/hv] Bidding to 3C showed: North: Max 15-17NT without 3c♥ South: 5c♥, no 4c♠, limit+ Do you agree with 4NT & 6NT? 4NT was understood by both players as Quantitative 5♣ is max with 4c♣ (probably 4=2=3=4 or 3=2=4=4)

RDBL is undefined in our system. But we can still bid our hand like the DBL didn't occur, so RDBL should logically be business. I considered it for a moment, but preferred to keep the bidding clear for my partner.

yes, 3♠ is good invite We play 3♣ as invite, responder has to give false preference if weaker I'm ok with this forcing 2♣, but less with the jump to 3NT. Will discuss it with my partner.Maybe we should keep 3NT for an unbalanced 15-17. 1♦-1♠ 2♣-2♥ 3NT = 1354 or 1255, 15-17 This only leaves a problem if we opened 1♥ with 15-17 and balanced/or not balanced: 1♥-1♠ 2♣-2♦ 3NT => 3NT=15-17, often unbalanced; 2NT=12-14 or 18-19

Yes, 4♦ will be understood as re-transfer and 4NT is then RKC.

[hv=pc=n&s=s84hkqjt2dqj5caq5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1n(15-17)p2c(puppet%20to%202D)p2d(forced)d2s(5cH%2C%20limit+)p3c(Max%2C%20no%20H-Fit)p4np5cp6nppp]133|200[/hv] Bidding to 3C showed: North: Max 15-17NT without 3c♥ South: 5c♥, no 4c♠, limit+ Do you agree with 4NT & 6NT? 4NT was understood by both players as Quantitative 5♣ is max with 4c♣ (probably 4=2=3=4 or 3=2=4=4)

see OP. 3C is splinter.

The quoted text that I did put in bold made me think that I might miss something... My question came from bar discussion. I said that I would always duck 3 times (it was played at MP's), others said to duck only once or twice because of the danger of a Heart switch. LHO started ♣K - small discouraging ♣ from RHO (I played my 2nd smallest hoping LHO would continue ♣); and LHO continued with ♣Q, another small ♣ from RHO (no T or 9 appeared). I thought it was best to duck 3 times if possible (duck 3 clubs or 2 clubs and a heart). - weaker opps will possibly not find the H-switch and RHO might have more problems with his discards. - I don't see how not ducking a 2nd time would help against expert opps. Is that correct or is there an advantage of taking 1st/2nd/3rd club? ...And I thought it is best to duck 4 times at IMPs (if possible)?

Bidding: 1D-1S 2C-2H ? => 2NT/3NT We play that 2C is natural, but forcing (and 3C mini-splinter). 2H is 4th suit GF. We agreed that 2NT shows extras and 3NT is minimum (12-13). Because we have not yet limited our hand it is important to do that somehow. But 3NT is not a nice bid (as mentioned by someone in another post): Opener can have a minimal 1354 hand and responder a strong hand with 6cS. If opener bids 3NT then responder bids 4S, while 3NT is probably the better contract. Any suggestions? (Edited after comment ahydra)

I thought it was best to duck 3 times at mp's and 4 times at imp's. even if RHO discourages club. Is a heart switch worse for declarer then not ducking?

All Vulnerable [hv=pc=n&s=sak2ha2dq943ca832&n=sqt43h8753daktcj4]133|200[/hv] South showed a max 1NT without 4c Major, North showed 2 4c Majors. 1NT-2D (15-17; transfer H) 2H-2S (No 4cH; 4cS) 3C-3NT (No 4cS-max; to play) LHO leads ♣K. How often should you did if given the possibility by the opps. At MPs or at IMPs; (does it matter if opps are expert or not?)

thanks Chris! I played this the same, but was less convinced about ♠K, certainly with West discouraging with ♠9 (from ♠K9). LHO had: ♠K9 ♥63 ♦QT742 ♣J983 BTW: running 1000 samples analysis: Trick 1: Jack slightly prefers to take ♦K Trick 3: Jack slightly prefers a ♣ (followed by running ♥J) over a ♥ to the J. Trick 5: Jack prefers to discard a ♣ rather than a ♠

This is no special 3NT, but I'm interested in your opinions! Do you agree with the decisions that I took or is there a better play? [hv=pc=n&s=sq42hak975dak3ct5&n=sjt86hj2d96cakq72&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c(2+)p1h(walsh)p1sp2d(4th%20suit)p3cp3nppp]266|200[/hv] West leads ♦2: 3rd/5th 1. W: ♦2-6-J-? Should I duck this or not?

I wonder if this is this true for all experts? Can North not have something like ♦QTxx for 3NT; and now cue ♦ to show that he has in fact 2nd round control?

I asked because when two suits are bid then we normally bid the suit in which we have a stopper. Doesn't that apply here?

What is 3♥ for you, natural?