toothbrush

Thanks for all the replies, I really learned a lot about it. I didn't realize that my bid of 4♣ was that bad, but I have to agree... :unsure: The 6♣ bid was a bit of a lucky guess. I think it may have been a good example how you learn to play bad bridge against players of low level.

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=skhqjxxxdqxxxcaxx&s=sxhkxxdxxckqjt9xx]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] (3♠)-4♣-(4♠)-5♣ (5♠)-p-(p)-dbl (p)-6♣-(dbl)-p (p)-p This is what my partner had. West lead ♠ for his partners A, switch ♥x for partners A and small ♥ back where East drops a ♠!!!! Can you believe it, East had a singleton ♥ and a void ♣. Because of this misdefence I went only 1 down (should be -3) for 100 and a top because many E-W pairs bid and made 6♠. While East was thinking about his opening bid, I was planning to preempt with 5♣ when East would have opened something normal. After the 'surprise'-3♠ I still wanted to show my good ♣ because I thought that they had something to make in ♠ but I agree that 4♣ is an overbid. Imo easts bid of 5♠ is very silly. When someone preempts, he's supposed to leave all decisions to his partner and pass all the way. When partner doubled 5♠ I supposed that he was hoping for at least 1 trick from me but I had none (or may be ♥K), that's why I bid 6♣ after 5♠. I may have been lucky, but I think there are enough reasons for me to bid after my partners dbl.

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sxhkxxdxxckqjt9xx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] (3♠)-4♣-(4♠)-5♣ (5♠)-p-(p)-dbl (p)-? We had no specific agreements on bidding over preempts, so 4♣ just shows a good hand with good clubs.

trf ♥ and pass

Easy pass when THEY ar vulnerable and we're not. At this vulnerability better 2♦ i think

NF

I don't see a squeeze either. I play all the trumps and then go for the finesse if opps didn't make mistakes.

Can't we just redeal?

I think partner invites for slam, but I have a minimum with only 1 ace, so I pass.

2NT isn't a good bid imo, it takes too much space away and doesn't describe your hand. 3♦ as answer on 2NT is also wrong as you admitted, I prefer 3♣. 4♦ is also a bad bid because you have no idea what partner has. What if it's a misfit and partner bid 3♦ on 2♦-1♣?? I prefer bidding just 2♣ and when opps repeat ♥ I double for takeout.

Agree I can never believe that opponents will not interrupt when I have this distribution.

Pass and double. Partner doesn't need to have much for his 2♠ after a 2♥ overcall, so I don't see possibilities for a game. 3♥ is a very strange bid. This kind of bidding is imo only possible for players that don't play weak two's and if they do play weak two, this opponent is a loser! I want partner to chose between 3♥ doubled and 3♠.

Years of experience have taught me that partners can always come up with other answers to these impromptu sequences. Why would you inflict this uncertainty on your partnership when surely anyone above the level of novice would understand that transferring into ♣ and then bidding ♥ twice shows a good 5=6? By transferring to ♥ first, we will find the fit in ♥ at 3♥ and that makes it easy to find out slam. When opener doesn't support ♥ and I bid over 3NT, it's obvious that I don't want to play NT, neither ♥, so it must be a slam-invite in ♣. When you first transfer to ♣, you'll find the fit in ♥ only at the 4th level!! Imo partner will be unable to estimate his values so I think it's important to stay as low as possible.

I guess some players will be in 3NT (a good contract imo). When ♠ finesse works, the 3NT-players will always get a better score i believe (at least 11 tricks with the ♥A good). That's why I hope ♠K is at East. Besides, in every game there are losers that stay in a part-score or go to a bad slam and go down so I'd play for the certain 40%.

I like the contract of 3♥, but I don't like the dbl. I believe that when the bidding goes (1♣)-p-(1♠)-p;(2♠) we can still try to get them one level higher. Bidding immediately shows imo too much ambition for game.

I don't see what 4♠ could mean else, so i must agree

pass: ♣ are losers, I have only 2 tricks

I believe I'll transfer ♥, with the intention to repeat ♣ twice because I'm not at all interested in 3NT: 1NT-2♦ 2♥-3♣ 3NT-4♣ Partner should know that I have only 5 hearts and no more because with 6+♥ I would've jumped to some control-bid after the trf. 4♣ after 3NT shows imo an extreme hand with slamambition in ♣.

indeed, better ask what 2♦ means

I believe that when trumps are 4-1 you can only win when ♦ are 3-3 :rolleyes: When you leave one trump outside, the opp with 4 trumps can probably ruff the 3rd♦ and collect a ♠. When you leave him with 2 trumps, and he ruffs the 3rd ♦, he forces you to ruff a ♠ with a high trump. This is then the last time you're in your hand and you will have to hand over a trick in ♥. So I think the first thing to do is playing TWO rounds of ♣ and when they're 4-1, play a 3rd round of it, cross to dummy (♥) and play ♣J. Then play 5 rounds of ♦. When trumps are 3-2, you take the finesse in ♥ after the 2nd round of ♣. When it wins, you can ruff a ♠, and cross back to dummy to play ♣J and play 3 rounds of ♦ to eliminate the 2nd ♠-loser. When the ♥-finesse loses, you have an extra entry (♥Q) to develop ♦.

I still have ambition for game when partner bid voluntary 2♦. With at least 22hcp together and a certain fit ♦ I'm pretty sure I won't let them play 2♠ undoubled. I prefer bidding 3♥. To bid NT, I need more support in ♦ (3card with a top honour)

oops i misjudged the situation, NORTH opened, NOT south, sorry

I think West asks for trouble with his dbl on 1♥. Just pass, partner will dbl on 3♥ and then you bid 3NT. It may have been better to judge this problem without seeing the hand of East, but with a good stopper in ♥ and values in minors, 3NT must be a reasonable option. :P When you play doubles like the double of West, I believe you're convicted to play 4♠ on this one.

I also agree with Marlowe :P I believe that you need a very strong hand for a leaping michaels, maximum 4 losers. This hand counts at least 5 or 6 losers so isn't strong enough for that.

3♣ natural, GF