kgr

I hesitated between passing and opening 1♦, but that is a good reason to open 1♦ :) Partner did bid 1♠ showing ♥ and I did bid 1NT. Partner had: Kxx=Jxxxx=Jxx=Kx Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx 1NT did go -1

Sorry, I don't remember the exact hands: [hv=d=w&v=e&n=sqxhkqtxdajxcqxxx&w=saxxxxhdqxxxcakxx&e=skjxxxhjxxxxxxdxc&s=shaxxdkxxxxcjxxxx]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] I felt happy with the initial responses, but then came some experts suggesting that DBL was not good and even a suggestion for 6♣ :) I DBL'ed 5♠ and partner did lead a small ♣. Opps did make 5♠X +1. 6♣ would have gone -1 or -2.

IMPs W/- Qxx=Axx=AQxx=xxx Would you open this hand after 3 passes at IMP's? (Partner will open most 12 pts and some 11 pts with 5 card Major).

3 bad hands of Swiss (IMP's) I played today: - - - 1NT-2NT! 3♣-6♣ 2NT was transfer to ♦, 3♣ was ♦ support and 6♣ was an offer to choose between ♣ and ♦. Dummy was 3=v=5=5 and my partner had ♠AQxx and some ♥'s headed by the ♥Q and did lead a low ♥. I had ♠Kxxx. With a ♠ lead the contract goes -2 and with a ♥ lead it made on a dummy reversal. - - - 1♣-1♥!......1♥= transfer to ♠ 1♠!-2♦!......1♠= 3 card ♠ & forcing; 2♦= 5 card ♠ & limit+ 3♥!-4♦!.......3♥= splinter & 12-14HCP; 4♦= 1st or 2nd control 4♠ We both denied a ♣ control, a ♣ was started and we made 4♠+1. At the other table they didn't bid controls and they played 6♠= AQT=A=QJxx=Jxxxx KJ9xx=KQx=AKx=xx - - - Opps also made a slem with 2 aces out. We both had one Ace. At our table we stopped in 5♠ - - - Maybe it is better not to bid controls and blast slem without asking. Often honours will be divided anyway?....Or should we lead more often an ace when opps blast to slem without bidding controls?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=saqtxxhakxdjtxxxc]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♠-1NT 2♦-2♠ - - - 1NT is not forcing, but can include hands with 3 card ♠ and 4 to 6 HCP. So partner has: - 3 card ♠ and 4 to 6 HCP OR - 6 to 9 HCP and simple preference for ♠ Do you bid more?

[hv=d=w&v=e&s=shaxxdkxxxxcjxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] (1♠)-DBL-(4♠)-4NT (Pass)-5♣-(5♥)-Pass (5♠)-Pass-(Pass)-??? - - - - - Do you agree with 4NT and Pass? - Is partners pass forcing? - What do you bid now?

Q872 vs AT4 - - - 1. What is best play for 2 tricks? 2. I entered this combo in suitplay, but got not enough memory error. Is there a way to increase memory to be used by suitplay? 3. You play 4M and above combo is side suit in which you can only affort 2 loosers. If you enter this in suitplay, then is 2 loosers same as saying 2 winners? ...How to enter this? Thanks, Koen

From suitplay help text: What is meant by this? I would think that one line is always best percentage?

Thanks for the answers. I opened 4S with this hand, but didn't feel comfortable with this bid. Next time I'll probably bid less when Red. x=Kxxxx=xxx=KJxx vs KQ9xxxxx=x=xx=xx Bidding did go: (P)-4S-(DBL)-All Pass LHO had 4 aces and most of the other points. I was able to make ♣K, but LHO had singleton ♠A. 4♠x -3 was almost a 0%.

MP's E/NS KQ9xxxxx=x=xx=xx I did open this hand 4S at MP's. 2nd hand and Vul against not. - You agree? - Probably worst situation to open 4S or maybe IMP's would be worse? - When is this good enough to open 4S (always when Not Vul, always in 3rd hand, 1st and 3rd hand at MP's...)? Thanks, Koen

Somebody I know plays some kind of Lebensohl here: (1M)-DBL-(Pass)-1NT is relay to 2C, weak or strong. and (1M)-DBL-(Pass)-2x is more then minimum: 7-9. What do you think about this idea?

KQJTx xx -- AKTxxx imps. 1D - 2C 2H - 2S 3C - 3S 3N - 4C 4S Is 2S 4th suit forcing in 2/1? I guess partner would have cued D or H with an ace and has something like: Ax-Kxxx-KJxx-Jxx

Suppose honours are divided between the two suits. You have 6=4=2=1 and 11 or 12 pts (or a minimum hand according to your methods). You open 1♠ and partner bids a non-forcing 1NT. Do you bid 2♠ or 2♥? - - - With 6-4 in ♥ and minor: After 1♥-1NT: Do you bid 2♥ or 2 minor. After 1♥-♠: Do you bid 2♥ or 2 minor. - - - With 6-4 in ♦ and ♣: After 1♦-1NT: Do you bid 2♦ or 2♣. After 1♦-1M: Do you bid 2♦ or 2♣. - - - Thanks, Koen PS: I prefer to rebid my opening suit to limit my hand and I also think it gives opps least opportunity to intervene. But I wonder if it is best.

Not here, but I wondered if you would ever stop below 5♣. If bidding would go eg: (1S)-2NT-(P)-3C (P)-3S-(P)-4C - - BTW: it looks like South hand would be better if Clubs were: AKQJx ?

I play both of them as take out. (I play most DBL's as takeout unless it is agreed otherwise or unless it is clear.) I wonder if takeout is not better on 2nd hand...even more at MP's? eg with: AKxx KJxx Jxxx x - - - or: Axxx KJxx x Qxxx

Thanks for the answers. If you bid 2NT followed by 3♠, will you ever stop below 5♣? [hv=d=e&n=sxxxhxxdqxxcxxxxx&s=saxhadkjtxxcakqjt]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] I did bid 4NT: (1S)-4NT-(P)-5C All Pass - - Because bidding and play was fast, I don't know how bidding would have gone if you bid 2NT. LHO did have a bad 6 card ♥, but was probably to weak to bid over 2NT.

Is XX better then Pass to ask 3NT? (We play that XX shows 1st control in cue-bidding auctions, so it would be easier to keep same meaning here in case 3S was advanced cue).

(1S)-1D 1D bidder holds: A Kx AKJxx Axxxx ...Can he replace 1D with 2NT? This depends of the meaning of 1D bid. He explains: "I was planning to open 1D but then saw the opening bid of 1S and thought to bid 2NT. I have no idea why I did place the 1D card on the table at that moment"...or he explains: "I wanted to bid 2NT. I have no idea how the 1D card came on the table". ...His 1D bid now means the same as 2NT because he actually wanted to bid 2NT, but accidentally placed 1D on the table. So he can always replace 1D with 2NT? => A player who knows the new law can always get away by saying he wanted to bid the repalcement bid?

1♦-2♣ 2♦-3♣ 3♠-(DBL)-P-(P) 3NT - - We played 2♦ is catch all to deny 15+, 3♣ GF and 3♠ shows stop for 3NT. My partner suggested that Pass (over the DBL) by him asks me to bid 3NT, even without ♥ stop so that DBLer has to lead (he will off course not pass the 3NT without ♥ stop).

[hv=d=e&s=saxhadkjtxxcakqjt]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You plan to open 1♦ and are happy that if you follow it with 2♣ that it is forcing in your system. But to your surprise your RHO opens 1♠. What is your plan? 2NT and 4NT are both for the minors, or do you start with a DBL?

Right. With 3/3 Majors he would bid 3♥ This is something I don't do enough (probabky because it isn't very important on most bidding): reconstructing the hands during the bidding.

trying to avoid that by posting the hand here and let everybody say how very bad it was :o

[hv=n=s32hjt93dqt7653c6&w=skt754h2d9cqjt432&e=saq96hq8dk82ca975&s=sj8hak7654daj4ck8]399|300|[/hv] 4♠ DBL'ed contract. I had actually 2 good reasons to pass out the 4♠. The 1st one made clear by all the responses (thanks fo that), the 2nd is that my partner had a long think over 4♠. But I just didn't like the inital pass and then bidding 4♠ of West, but I should have known better..I wasn't playing against beginners here.

[hv=n=skj9632hj3d54ca84&w=s87hak7652dajcqt9&e=st5h94dkt962cj762&s=saq4hqt8dq873ck53]399|300|[/hv] I did bid 3NT. This time my (bad) bid was succesful.

I think it's hard to make rules about this sort of ending, because there is so much more variety than with no-loser squeezes. My first diagram is unusual, because the the entry to the clubs is in spades rather than in clubs itself, the squeeze occurs before declarer has set up his 11th trick, and there is an endplay threat in both suits. The second diagram is more typical, and probably corresponds more closely to what Uday was describing. In the second diagram, ♠10 could be a small card and the endplay would still work. In the first diagram, if East had been able to keep a diamond, that would have beaten it. In the second diagram, East can't keep a red-suit winner, because he will be squeezed out of it when the last heart is cashed. The difference is that declarer has already scored his spade trick, so East has one fewer card. Thanks again..interesting. Does that squeeze in your 1st diagram has a name?...A double throw in..? And what does he think of you now? I guess: Nice try, but still to learn a lot.