AL78

I wasn't playing, but I know the North player and I don't think she is up to working out that 5♥ has a good chance of getting a better score.

My friend tried the club ace which (very unluckily) turned out bad. [hv=pc=n&s=skhaq3dkj65cat863&w=sq862h4d7432ckq42&n=s5h87652dat8cj975&e=sajt9743hkjt9dq9c&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1sd3sp4sppp]399|300[/hv] The ace gets ruffed and the diamond losers go away on the established ♣KQ. 12 tricks made, 27% NS. A diamond, ♥A or ♠K are the leads which don't give anything away (declarer will play for the drop). It is one of those luck based hands where the opening leader has no safe lead from their perspective, and they just have to pick one and hope.

I would have thought since West showed up with the ♦K, almost every other honor card will be with the overcaller East. It is possible he could have KQJxx Jx Jxx xx but that is a very specific hand type (and why not lead the king). I'd be inclined to take the club finesse rather than play to the ace and try to ruff out the king. The lack of a weak jump overcall suggests East doesn't have that much shape and only a five card suit.

MPs. [hv=pc=n&s=skhaq3dkj65cat863&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=p1sd3sp4sppp]133|200[/hv] I wasn't playing so I am making an educated guess as to the auction. Your lead.

MPs [hv=pc=n&s=sa3hat853d83cq654&n=skq942hk6dkjt97ct&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=pp1sp2hppp]266|200[/hv] ♠6 led, plan the play.

5 card majors, strong NT: ♠A986 ♥K3 ♦A654 ♣Q75 1♦ 1♥ ?

That is a very precise hand partner could have, pretty much the perfect hand with all the key controls and tricks in the right places. If partner did hold that hand, aren't they worth a slam nudge themselves?

Based on how I deal boards for my club: The machine takes boards that are numbered and have the correct vulnerability and dealer for the board number. This is universal, so will be hard-coded into any hand generation software. When you come to deal the boards, the software will send the deals to the machine in numerical order, so you start with inserting board 1, and follow with board 2, 3, .... The software tells you what board you should be inserting. The boards also come with barcode stickers on them which the machine reads to check the correct board number has been inserted (on the software I have used, this can be switched off). The software also has the option of hiding the deal on screen as it is being dealt by the machine, so anyone who is dealing boards for a session can later play in that session without having any knowledge of the hands.

Thanks, smerriman explained it clearly, leading A or K strongly implies holding touching honors (and vice versa), so if partner leads an ace followed by a likely singleton, it is easier to decide to give a ruff.

With one of my former bridge partners, we played disturbed bids as weak, so would have to double or jump bid with strength. Unless you were playing that, West should have fouond another bid. It is standard for a change of suit to be forcing even after intervention, so West has no reason to decide East's hand is so weak that 2♥ is the best contract. 2NT seems the clear bid.

Yes I did mean East and I agree, punting the club slam is probably the best alternative.

As a result of the surprising responses, I am going to discuss this situation with her because we don't (as far as I know) have any agreement that leading an ace or king from an AK combination then switching says "give me a ruff". With a different (my more regular) partner, I once did lead an ace then switched to a singleton, which she won, then didn't return the suit. Her reasoning was if it was a singleton, I would have led it at trick one.

I assume the double was the start of showing a massive hand (intending to cue bid next round). That doesn't seem unreasonable at first glance except when partner passes with a spade stack. If you don't double, what do you do with the West hand?

That may be true, but I still should have thought about it more instead of playing too quickly. I know that in some cases, it is possible to guide partner to the correct action, but that is no substitute for working things out.

Possibly due to the absence of ruffing potential and nine losers, decided it was not enough for an invitational bid. If partner has a five loser hand they will invite.

I don't know whether the programming of the robots means you can deduce where key cards are (and are not) by their play, but in the absence of such information, I'd go for the finesse. There are 16 HCP outstanding, there is more HCP capacity in opener's hand to hold the ♥K. If it fails, I'll happily explain my reasoning to my partner if she wants to question it. This is an example of the type of hand I don't like at MPs. Whether to risk going down in a solid contract for the sake of an overtrick. One reason I prefer teams.

If you are playing Jacoby, you can't use 2NT to show a flat hand with 10-12 HCP. That is one of the costs of adopting a convention, you lose the natural meaning for the bid. You have to decide if the benefits of the convention outweigh the loss of the natural meaning. In this case, if you are playing some variant of Acol, it is a minimal loss, since if you have enough HCP to respond 2NT, you have enough to bid a suit at the two level, so you can do this followed by 2NT which effectively says the same thing. The one awkward hand where partner opens 1♠ and you have precisely 3433 shape with around 11 HCP, you can start by bidding your best three card minor, and what you do after that will depend on what partner bids.

In the interest of not looking like I am deliberately posting hands where my partner made a mistake, here is one where I just didn't think at trick 2. Cross-IMPS. South ♠74 ♥AJ9832 ♦74 ♣Q87 [hv=d=s&v=n&b=15&a=2d2s3d4sppp]133|100[/hv] 2♦ was the Multi. Partner leads the ♥7. Dummy comes down with: ♠AK2 ♥K54 ♦T63 ♣A94 Declarer plays the 6. What do you do after winning with the ace? You would likely deduce the heart is a certain singleton and return one for partner to ruff, who would then cash two top diamonds taking the contract down. I had the fact she bid diamonds at the three level stuck in my mind, thinking if declarer held the king I need to lead through it now or never, and returned a diamond without thinking, blowing the defence. [hv=pc=n&s=s74haj9832d74cq87&w=sq98653hqt6dj9ck3&n=sjth7dakq852cjt65&e=sak2hk54dt63ca942]399|300[/hv] I must make a plan before playing to trick 2. I must make a plan before playing to trick 2. I must make a plan before playing to trick 2. ... Not as bad as it could have been (only four tables, and one pair went three off in 2♥, no-one else bidding game EW), but still, if it is an evening where we have to defend 15 out of 21 boards, I really need to do better than this.

Apart from with my current partner, I've tended to use the two suited overcalls on either weak or strong hands, either we are suggesting a distributional game or we are suggesting sacrificing over the opponent's game. Overcalling on intermediate hands as well means partner has to consider we might be competing the part score as well, that is three different aims and we have to estimate which one when we are at the three level and all partner knows is which two suits I have.

I opened 1♣. This was the result: [hv=pc=n&w=sj62h8765dkj86ca7&e=sa8haktd4ckqt8652&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp1cp1hp3cppp]266|200[/hv] Making +2 for 27%. Partner thought I should have opened 2♣ and showed 8/9 playing tricks in clubs. I thought partner was worth another bid after my jump rebid. Partner was worried about the spade suit. There is a way of showing in which unbid suits you have or don't have stops but it escapes me currently.

What goes through my head playing against the slowest players in the field (again).

Is that the case even if you are playing something like Benji Acol and can show a strong Acol 2 hand with 2♣?

5 card majors, strong NT. 1♦ (P) 1♠ (2♣) 2NT How strong would you expect the 2NT to be?

♠A8 ♥AKT ♦4 ♣KQT8652 MPs, game all, after two passes, what do you open?

Thanks for your analysis. You tend to respond with excellent reasoning, not only solid but reasoning I can follow as well. I can't really criticise partner for not working all that out to come to the conclusion a heart switch is needed, I'm not confident I would in that seat and may well have lazily lead another diamond without thinking. It does illustrate that immediately making what looks like a standout action isn't necessarily the right action, and that one should go through the process of visualising the layout and checking whether or not what you are about to do is really optimal.