kgr

For my partners defense: This was at the last table of a pairs event. He felt (and appeared to be correct in that) that we needed one more top to win the event. That is why he preferred to bid 3NT without giving too much info to opps. ...we ended 2nd. and where would you have ended if you had not gotten a 0 on this one(deserved if not in fact)? Still 2nd. (4H would have been around 60% iso 0% and the difference with 1st pair was 2.19%; 28 deals; small tournament)

your partner is meta-agreement challenged! For my partners defense: This was at the last table of a pairs event. He felt (and appeared to be correct in that) that we needed one more top to win the event. That is why he preferred to bid 3NT without giving too much info to opps. ...we ended 2nd.

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=saxxhkxdkqxckqtxx&s=sxhajtxxxdxxxxcjx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] My partner did bid a fast 3NT because it was MPs. (I'm not 100% sure about his hand) That was probably too much of a gamble. Almost everybody made 4H and we were down in 3NT. He says that I should correct to 4H with a weak hand because he would never bid it without a stop in one of majors, and therefor he has at least ♥Hx.

The bidding like it did go at the table was not really according to system. Normally North should have 3 card ♥ for accepting the transfer. Without it he should bid 3NT. After 3NT South bids 4♥, showing a 6c♥ and slam interest opposite a 3c♥ (and possibly also opposite a good 2c♥??). ...That makes 3♦ more attractive?

3th hand: We open 1♦; and support DBL 8th hand: 2NT and Support DBL are ok, but probably support DBL (good ♥ and no ♦ values) ..Rest of the hands look ok

No, I imply that against 6NT West will sooner take his Ace if he is less good. It is a 'stopper' if that allows you to best describe your hand....maybe partner had ♠QJx, but I don't think so because 6NT could only be made if ♠A was played in air. 1♦=4+card ♥, 6+pts (same a normal 1♥ bid)3♦=5+card ♥, Slam interest if a 6c♥ (with 6c♥ and no slam interest we bid 4♦

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sxhajtxxxdxxxxcjx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] 2♦!-3NT 2♦=Multi (Weak 6cMajor, ...or something strong) 3NT=not agreed (partner could ask your hand with 2NT). At the table the opps didn't make it feel like a psych. 3NT was probably bid to make, thinking that it will be a better contract then 4M at MP's. ...You are minimal for your opening. Too weak to pass?

[hv=d=n&n=sqxxhkqdaxxcakxxx&s=skxxxhaxxxxxdqjxc]133|200|[/hv] 1♣-1♦!-(1♠) 2NT-3♦! 3♥!-3♠! 4♣!-4♥ 6♥-all pass 1♣=We open 5542 1♦=transfer ♥ 2NT=18-19, mostly no 3c♥ 3♦=transfer ♥, 5+c♥ 3♥=3c♥ (my partner thought that KQ was enough support after not support DBL first 3♠=1st/2nd control 4♣=1st/2nd control (better hand then non-serious 3NT) 6♥-1 after a ♠ lead and a ruff. Should South convert to 6NT against not experts?

It is much the same as stayman followed by 3♣ is GF? What do you think that North should bid? Pass 1NT ; or 2♦ transfer to ♥ followed by 2NT? yes, it is exactly like stayman, then 3C as GF except: it isn't a game force hand, and wouldn't follow through with a 3 club bid after finding a heart fit. The choices would be to bid 3H after stayman, inviting game or to be grateful you found a heart fit and pass 2H. I would probably invite game in hearts and play it in 3, which isn't so joyful, either, due to the nature of the original NT opener. You should compare North's action here with a stayman auction and a misfit: 1NT-2♣-2♦-?? ; 2NT or 3♣?

It is much the same as stayman followed by 3♣ is GF? What do you think that North should bid? Pass 1NT ; or 2♦ transfer to ♥ followed by 2NT?

I never thought 3NT would play better then 4♥ opposite 18-19 balanced. It is possible that partner has no, or few, ♣ honours.

[hv=n=saxxhtxxxdxcatxxx&s=skqxhkxxxdkqxcqxx]133|200|[/hv] I did bid 4♥. 4♥ was hopeless. 3NT would have had a change against not optimal defense. (E.g ♦ lead for RHO ♦A and no ♥ switch)

Not agreed. If my partner would bid that I would expect that 4♦ is a splinter (he loves to open 1NT atypical). ....but it is a good suggestion: 4♦ is 3433 with a good hand.

[hv=d=n&s=skxxxhaxxxxxdqjxc]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♣-1♦!-(1♠) 2NT-?? 1♦=transfer ♥ Partner showed 18-19 pts balanced hand, a stop in ♠, 3+c♣ He could DBL with a 3c♥, but with 3c♥ he can also choice to bid 2NT (eg with good double stop ♠ and balanced hand). How do you evaluate your hand? Will you bid Game, invite slam, force slam? You can now bid: 3♦=transfer ♥, partner will accept with 3c♥ (If partner does not accept then 4♥ shows slam interest, better hand then direct 4♦) 4♦=transfer ♥ 4♥=slam force ♥ (No agreement what 3♥ iso 3♦ would be, without the 1♠ bid it would be transfer ♠, but here it is probably same as 3♦, but preference to play in own hand). Remark: You can't show you shortage in ♣

[hv=d=s&s=skqxhkxxxdkqxcqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Bidding: 1NT-2♦! 2♥!-3♣ 2♦ = transfer ♥, 4c♥ if inv+; 5c♥ if weak 2♥ = no 4c♥ or 3433 3♣ = 4c♥, 5+c♣ and GF 3♥ would be control for ♣, you can only show your 4c♥ by bidding 4♥ now. => 3NT or 4♥?

Sorry, corrected now (I hope).

[hv=n=shdaqxckjx&w=shxdkjcaxx&e=shdtxxxcqx&s=sxxhdxxcxx]399|300|[/hv] The contract was 4S. I played a ♣ to the K and returned a small ♣ taken by East with his ♣Q. Now I had a brain misfunction and thought that ♣J was high and claimed all tricks. [hv=n=shdaqxckjx&w=shxdkjcaxx&e=shdtxxxcqx&s=sxxhdxxcxx]399|300|[/hv] East has to return a ♦ to AQ in dummy. Will EW get another trick or not? (Maybe I even said in the claim that a ♦ goes on the ♣J, but if East has to play a ♦ it would be very illogical not to play ♦A iso ♣J?)

That's definitely not worth mentioning! <_< I'm not sure about this bidding!! First verify how it did go, before killing them. ...Or were you playing NS at our table in this deal? If you're not sure about who you played against, how the auction went, and if I was sitting North, then why do you bring this up? I'm not interested in what happened at another table. We already talked about this with our team mates after they ruined this deal for us. As I said, it's not worth mentioning... What does interest me is what happened at my table. Me and my partner had a different view on the meaning of this pass, so it's important that we get a better understanding of this situation for the future. Can we now get back to the discussion instead of lecturing me what to do with team mates? Sorry about my joke. I was actually wondering if I played against you. Could have been interesting to get to know other BBF poster. FWIW: I think it is forcing if you have the explicit agreement that this is forcing. (eg if you have the agreement that pass is forcing after you have bid a vuln game). If you don't have that agreement then it is not forcing. (Because 4H bidder can be weak).

That's definitely not worth mentioning! :P I'm not sure about this bidding!! First verify how it did go, before killing them. ...Or were you playing NS at our table in this deal?

I think that I played this one against your team in the closed room. 1♣-(1♠)-DBL-(Pass) 2♥-(2♠)-3♥-...??? I'm not sure how this continued, but I think that North started with 1♠ (also not sure).

I did bid 5H and that did go -1. 4S makes: [hv=n=s543hj93d97643c62&w=sqj82hqdt2cqt8543&e=sat76h7dakj8ckj97&s=sk9hakt86542dq5ca]399|300|[/hv] RHO play ♦KA and ♠Ax I was lucky that RHO didn't place me for the choice by returning a 3th ♦

right (maybe 3♥ is best. The suit is good enough and less risks for misunderstanding. ...3♠ is also good to avoid 5-6 misunderstanding. Theoretically best I think)

excuse me, but what I should have said is that most of the people in my part of the world play it that way, I have no reference for the rest of the world other than these forums, where I have also seen that suggested as a treatment. 2NT..3NT is 13-14 for us.

Yes 3NT is to play. 2NT followed by 3NT is slam try 13-14. I would bid 3♦, 4SF I think

This was our not so successful bidding: [hv=d=s&v=e&n=sqjt43ht53da852cj&s=sa6hakq8dkca98632]133|200|[/hv] 1♣-1♥! (1♥=T-Walsh, transfer ♠) 2♥-3♦ (2♥=reverse, denying 3c♠, 1♠ would have been 3c♠ and forcing) (3♦=4SF) 4♣-4♥ 4NT-5♣ (5♣=4 or 1) 6♣-All pass 4♥ was meant by partner as a proposal to play, I took it as ♥-control for ♣. Maybe proposal to play is better?