karlson

I think it's probably right to play penalty and would assume that with a random expert. But if I had discussed 1♠-p-p-2♥-2♠-x as takeout (which I think is good and about which we had about a 50/50 split iirc), I would take this one to be takeout too; the auctions look too similar.

Don't most people play 4♣ forcing on the last auction? Seems like we should do that, then if partner comes out with 4♦ choice of games we can offer 4♠? I would open 4 and 3 on the first two though I wouldn't call 4 on the first one routine, I think it's mildly pushy.

I would expect this double to be takeout undiscussed with an expert partner almost anywhere. I think any of the first four descriptions could double except balanced hands with most of their stuff in spades. It's unfortunate that there are so many hand types, but at least we have left a lot of possibilities open.

I blame East 100%. What did he think West had? If west had only 7 clubs, then he's probably 7-4, which would be just fine too. Perhaps West could have bid more slowly, but I'm not convinced it would have led to a perfect auction.

I don't think people are really saying professional bridge is an evil. Certainly I didn't mean my comment that way. But I do like the idea of there existing one international event where the teams are really defined by the players' country of origin, and it's reasonable to suppose that it's the best team from that country. I'm willing to accept that this is impossible with the US bridge economy, but it was still somewhat true for most other countries. I have no problem with the fact that I can't keep track of who's on whose team in the Spingold even though I enjoy watching it immensely. But I am not looking forward to the day when I can't remember if Fred is playing for Vietnam or Paraguay in the BB. It just doesn't fit my desires for an international tournament. But if that's the necessary consequence of a lack of money for pro bridge players, then so it goes I guess (though I wish we were pursuing some other ways to increase popularity, but that's a topic for another day).

This seems to shatter any last illusions that the international championships are not professional events. I think it's a bit sad.

While I admit that I've reconsidered my original pass, I still strongly disagree with this statement. We're the ones who should be doubling 2s with a wide variety of hands on this auction, since our hand is more unknown than partner's. To me passing 2s really screams that I have hearts and nothing else, though of course it need not be quite this pure. So I think after our pass partner should only double with very good spades, though perhaps this hand is still too extreme to sit.

Surprised this one didn't get much interest, I thought it was a good problem. I'm going to assume it means no one ever really knows what to do in these spots. I think that the ♦A lead is crazy -- lefty rates to have 6, so we're really only playing for partner having a void, with which he might have doubled. I would have led a club too had I passed, but I wasn't sure at all that would be enough to beat it, so I just saved in 6♠. But today the ♦A lead would have been the big winner -- lefty was 1651 and partner 6115. 6♠ escaped for -300 when they didn't get their club ruff.

I admit I didn't really consider rho splitting from QJx. I think it would be a very unusual play and I'd pay off to it (cashing another heart). But maybe I should play a low heart off dummy to discourage it.

I find the Jxxxxxx constructions a lot more plausible than the Axxxxx ones, so I would pass.

I would just run the heart 9 at trick 2. The line given above seems to risk going down when righty has ♥QJx ♣Qxxx or three hearts and stiff club, and I don't see the gain. (if the heart hook loses, I will cash the A next, then take the club hook, surviving 4-1 clubs if trumps are 3-2).

I would pass and pass the double. I don't see what we're supposed to make. I guess I would probably lead a diamond.

I played the same way as the consensus. Hearts were 5-0 so that was -1. I was hoping to get a discussion about what hands righty would defend like this with. I think that it's a bit weird, and weakly suggests that the ♦K might well be onside (of course he could also think we're 5-5). I think it would also be more common without the ♥Q than with, so maybe taking the first round finesse in hearts has some merit.

It'd be nice to have more agreement about 3♦ (I usually just give up on asking doubler for a stopper, which means east should bid 3♠), but I think the biggest error was west sitting for 4♦X (given that he started with 3♦).

I would pass. I might regret it if partner's clubs are internally solid, but I think something like x xx xxx AQJxxxx or x xxx Kxx KQJxxx is not so unusual, opposite which game needs a lot of luck.

[hv=pc=n&s=sqt94h5da7532cq95&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1hd2c(transfer%20to%20%21D)4spp5h5spp6hpp]133|200[/hv] We can have another thread on whether you would double 1♥, but it seems to have worked out. 2♣ showed diamonds. 5♥ was quick, but 6♥ was after about 3-4 minutes of thought. The opponents are quite capable but not world champs. If you pass or double, what do you lead? Edit: Sorry, IMP scoring, short match

[hv=pc=n&s=s94hajt75daqcqjt5&n=sk62hk93dj984cak3&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=2s3hp3sp4cp4hppp]266|200[/hv] Maybe you don't like the bidding, but it's not ridiculous. Anyway, you're in 4♥. Lead is the ♠8. You duck in dummy and righty wins the J, cashes the ♠A, lefty following, and plays a third spade (let's say a middlish spot). What's your plan, and does it change whether I tell you the opponents are weak or strong? (no particular surprise: if you pitch on this trick, lefty will ruff with a low ♥ and play a club).

Definitely. Thanks very much.

I recently read part 1 of Krzystof Martens' "Dynamic Declarer Play" and found it quite good. I'd say it's a similar difficulty level to most of Kelsey's books, but a somewhat different style.

It seems normal to me if the first sequence shows 6+ hearts but does not rule out other strains. The second sequence does rule out other strains. Both should be GF.

Unfortunately I'm not actually in San Francisco anymore, so I can't offer to play, but there are a large number of other SF-area people on the forums that might get in touch. The best club game in the city is at Quicktricks on Monday nights, which I guess doesn't really help. There is a Thursday night game at St. Mary's which is smaller and which I find less interesting, but it's definitely an option. There's also a Thursday night barometer game in Burlingame (a few miles south of the city) but I'm not sure the competition is any better. You can go to www.unit506.org for SF-specific information (www.unit498.com for Burlingame) or d21acbl.com for a more broad area. If you don't get any other responses, I'm happy to try to hook you up with a partner.

Takeout. It's not like we had another chance to show a takeout double of spades, so I don't see why the usual penalty/takeout arguments about 1n-(2x)-x wouldn't apply.

I would bid 3♦ over 2♥. 4♣ seems right after the sequence you've given.

This must be a laws issue or something. How am I playing with straube and not playing a fancy strong club system? Anyway, I would double.

I would go 3n, it seems like it will probably be a sensible contract.