nudnikbp

Three notrump. Partner may have something in diamonds or the defenders may guess incorrectly and allow 3NT to make.

It's a Lightner double, which asks for an unusual lead, such as dummy's first bid suit, but the bidding and your hand make it more likely partner has a club void, so lead a club.

4H.Partner could hold the heart king along with a decent club suit, so 4H hopefully will be playable, but it may go down 1.

Bid game. The heart queen is excellent and partner could hold Ace doubleton in spades.

I'd start with 2C and wouldn't expect to get passed out. Don't like double at all.

Playing with the robots, 1H seems normal.

North's two heart bid seems automatic because he has four trumps, and ace, and a doubleton. After the raise South has an easy four heart bid with his two suiter. North doesn't need much for four hearts to have a reasonable play, e.g., diamond king or diamond jack-ten along with the heart king or one other decent card.

You could overcall 2NT and partner would raise to 3NT, but down one is likely.

This is an elasticity of demand issue. Demand for daylongs at a price of .25 apparently was inelastic, so BBO gained by raising prices 56% if the number of players only dropped by 15%, i.e., total revenue received by BBO increased (with no increase in expenses since fewer people are now playing the daylong tournaments). In relative terms, demand was relatively unresponsive to the price change from .25 to .39. Alternatively, if BBO raised the daylong price 56% and the number of players decreased by 75%, then BBO would receive less total revenue after the price increase. In this alternative example, demand is elastic (relatively responsive to a price change), so BBO would lose revenue by raising the price from .25 to .39. You can go back an multiply .25 times the number of players under the old pricing to get BBO's total revenue; then multiply .39 times the number of p;ayers to see the total revenue effect for BBO using the new pricing.