HardVector

After a Woolsey double, 2c=pass or correct to diamonds; 2d=bid your major; 2h/2s=natural (my suit)

Bid 2s. If something else comes around to you again, then bid 3s. If you jump to 3s immediately, partner will never know if you have this, or what you are supposed to have which is a 16-18 pointer with 6 cards in the suit.

I've tried a lot of different systems and here is what I've concluded. You want to focus on the idea of DONT (disturb opponent's no trump). Unfortunately, I don't think that DONT doesn't do a good job of that. The most disruptive bids you can make are 2h and 2s. Having to double first then show your major allows them to exchange information and doesn't disrupt them. The same if you have to bid 2c to show a long suit. You leave Stayman and transfers intact for them. Another thing that bothers me, is systems in which you show a 2 suiter, but partner is allowed to be 5/4 in either suit. It sucks to play in a 7 card major fit when you have 9 in the minor (mp bid). That being said, I like Meckwell because their 2h/2s bids are natural single suiters and are VERY distruptive. I also like Woolsey as you can show hands that have a 4 card major with a longer minor, very useful in putting it in the right spot. Woolsey's single suited majors start with 2d taking away Stayman, so that's helpful. The 2c bid shows both majors, so they can try Stayman, but they are bidding into your hand doing that. Whatever you choose to do, you should resign yourself to bidding 3 of a minor if that is the strain you want to play. Rarely will you get to play 2 of a minor.

I'd bid 6♠. I don't know what agreements you have with your partner, but mine state that after a preempt we strive to bid what we think we can make expecting one trick from partner. If partner has the A♦, we have 3. Even without that card, if we get a club lead and partner has hearts, we can set up that suit for discards. I'm not worried about spades, partner has them, but opposite a stiff I'm not sure they will run the suit with no loser. If your agreements in this case include a solid suit, then I'd bid 6♣ looking for 7. The flip side, and this depends upon your understandings with your partner, is that partner may have stretched because you were behind. If you think partner is likely to stretch here, then 5♠ is the bid hoping partner will bid 6 with a true hand. Edit add: After thinking about this, I asked myself what would 5n be here? Would you play it as GSF, or pick a slam? If pick a slam, this hand might be perfect for that.

Pass. What's the problem?

I don't know about GIB, but I have never played the sequence of 1c-1d-1h-1s as being Gf or even showing extra values. I like the sequence and I think it shows exactly the hand that was shown, 3 hearts, inv values, and questions in the spades suit. With 4 hearts, you would have heard a raise after 1h.

Actually, you were correct. A spade back beats you. The real point of emphasis should be at trick 2. You need to run the ten♠. They beat you again by covering, however, so perhaps it's best not to telegraph it to the bots.

I'm willing to bet that a XX forcing opener to bid 2h followed by 3c is forcing.

If these hands frustrate you, then you should learn a strong club system.

Its not unreasonable here. Most of the time, I tell people not to lead unsupported aces, but here it's got some play. Your side needs to get 4 tricks to beat 4♠, and partner can see the A♥ and maybe the A♦. Where are the other 2? Partner is hoping to find you with a singleton heart, get a ruff, get back in with a diamond and give another ruff.

You just need to have a conversation with your partner on what a high (3 level +) level competetive bid is going to show. With your hand, I wouldn't be thinking 5 level, I'd be thinking slam. You have a magnificent hand in support of a partner who wants to play something at the 5 level opposite a passed hand and potential 0 pts. If your partner thinks that 4s-X just shows an opening hand, you are going to pretty much have to pass everything except total trash, and bid with that as a known sacrifice. Of course, if partner actually has legitimate values for the action, you are going to miss slams and grand slams. It is actually sometimes correct to let preempts go.

If you are sitting down with someone you don't know who hasn't informed you of what they are doing, you have to assume a very base system. I can't tell you how many times this has happened to me with Blackwood. Someone bids 4n and I have to figure out is it 1430, 0314, or even straight Blackwood. With no information to go on, I am forced into assuming that it's straight Blackwood as much as I would like it to be some kind of keycard. It's the same with inverted minors.

FYI, you stated NO agreements. Therefore, inverted minors is OFF. 3c would be invitational or forcing depending upon how far back in the bidding time machine you want to go. Everyone who voted 3c is stating that they are interested in game with this hand.

I notice that a lot of people talk about "rules" that you should follow in preempting, but rarely discuss the actual reason to preempt. The reason to preempt, is to force the opponents to guess what to do, and not your partner. Keeping that thought in mind will often guide you to making correct decisions if you are able to anticipate the way the auction may continue. For instance, if you are inclined to preempt with J9xxxx, consider what partner is going to lead holding Kx if the opponents end up in 3n. Your preempt has now caused partner to make a bad play if they lead the K, therefore the preempt was bad. I recently had someone preempt with me as a partner, and it turned out they had Txxxxx as their trump holding with 2 outside aces ("I had a 6 card suit and 8 pts, what's the problem?"). Their preempt caused me to take a 5 level "sacrifice" against a contract that the opponents couldn't make. These are examples where you are forcing your partner to guess what to do, and not the opponents, therefore are bad preempts. This is why no matter how aggressive you want to be, you need to have firm understandings with your partner as to what holdings you can have to preempt. If you could have anything from AKJ in your suit to Txxxxx, your range is too great and partner is going to have to guess. Now, if partner is a passed hand, then a lot of "rules" go out the window, because partner will rarely hang you as a passed hand.

Yes. The idea is to get partner in to lead through dummy to a suit that you like. You may have AQ surrounding Kx in the dummy and want partner to switch to that. You lead a card that indicates no real interest in the suit you are leading hoping that partner will do the right thing.

Rule 1: Take out takeout doubles...unless YOU can beat the contract for a number.

Personally, I've found that it's best to understand the fundamental difference in Precision auctions and standard. That is that all strong hands begin with 1♣. You will find that auctions that don't start with that bid become much easier in that very often slam is off the table if you have just moderate values opposite. Conversely, if you do start with 1♣, you will find that people have become VERY aggressive against that bid. I would make sure that you and your partner discuss in length your agreements when the opponents try to mess with you.

There is kamikaze, and there is totally insane. You have 0 (zero, nada, ziltch) quick tricks and 2 isolated queens. This hand is total trash.

This would be fairly easy using GUS (a strong club relay system). p-p-1c-(1s)-X = 8+, GF, balanced 2c (relay) - 2n (3+ controls, 4 hearts, denies 4 spades) 3s (asking, hearts) - 4s (2 keys + Q) Partner being a passed hand can't have anything more significant than AAQ, therefore; 7h...and not 7n.

I'm ok with the bidding. I wouldn't take the club hook at trick 1 and win with the ace. Then play a LOW spade to the ten. A good east holding either the A or the J will probably duck it. Only if they have AJx(x) will they snap it off. That gives me an entry to take a red suit finesse, probably the heart to begin with. Anyway, that's the way I'd start. It would take some reevaluation dependent upon what I see after that.

I think the OP was wondering why HELLO should change in the balancing position. As I recall, the convention features a penalty double. The reason this is undesirable in 4th seat has to do with positioning. In the direct seat, the 1n bidder is on your right, and your (presumable) penalty values are sitting over their hand. Also, if you are penalizing on 7 quick tricks, you are staring at them and know how you are going to take them. In 4th seat, the reverse is true, the 1n bidder is sitting over your hand. Even if you can see 7 tricks, partner is going to be on lead and the correct lead may be necessary to get them before the opponents can get their tricks (it is VERY possible that both sides can take 7 tricks depending upon the lead). These ideas make having a penalty double in 4th seat not as desirable as other meanings for the double. I think when I first ran across this convention, a double in 4th seat was used as a relay to 2c, but I haven't used this convention in quite awhile. Keep in mind, one of the key purposes of this convention is to get the 4th seat to play as many hands as possible. This position oriented strategy is one of the primary reasons for the convention. This is to get the 1n opener to make the opening lead which should generate extra tricks for you.

This hand highlights the truism that entries are the lifeblood of bridge. You are in 3n with the dummy having 7 diamonds to the QJT, you have Axx. You are given a finesse at trick 1 holding AJ opposite Kxx in clubs. Your instinct is to not "waste" a trick and win it as cheap as possible with the J. The problem, however, is that if diamonds split 3-0, the person with Kxx can now keep you from getting to the dummy if you win the first trick with the J. By winning the first trick with the A, you can then drive out the K of diamonds, eventually get back in, then get to your nice, juicy diamonds with the K of clubs. These hands are designed so that the one and only goal is to make your contract, forget about overtricks.

I would learn Smolen.

The main reason is so that the partner of the nt bidder can make better decisions. When you open nt, typically your partner is the decision maker from that point on in determining how high and in what strain you should be playing. If the range is too great, then that decision becomes more complex and more complex methods are needed to discover where you should play.

I like the 1♠ bid to show 6+ hcp and deny a major. You primarily want to clarify opener's hand, are they balanced 12-14/18-19, or are they unbalanced with real clubs? If they show balanced, you can decide if you want to play in 1n or 2c with a minimum or show better hands with other bids. Showing 4 clubs right away doesn't seem as useful as finding out about what your partner has opened. That allows 1n to show an unbalanced hand with 5+ clubs, and 2c to show diamonds.