karlson

♠-- ♥AQJ9xxx ♦AKQxx ♣x matchpoints, r/r, rho deals p-1♥-3♠-p 4♠-?

This is bad. The most important information if you have 5+-4+ minors is where your shortness is. How long minors are isn't tha valuable of information. The number one task is to assess if 3NT is better than 5m. There are also other hand types which should take priority like 6m, GF and major shortness. OP presented quite a decent simple structure. What you propose is complicated and has many obvious shortcomings. Hm, what would han say gnasher would say in this situation? Might it be possible to find out responder's shortness below 3nt?

By the way it seems to me that you're missing some basic pieces of followup bidding to stayman and transfers. With your 5440 example, if the 5 is a major, you could transfer and then bid one of your 4 card suits (natural game forcing). You should in fact do this with any 5-5 or 5-4 that looks like it might want to play in your other suit if that's the best fit. It also might help you find out if 3n is not a good spot despite no major suit fit. If the 5 is a minor, you can accompish the same thing by starting with stayman to look for the 4-4 major fit, and not finding it, continue with 3 of your minor (again, natural and game forcing).

What gwnn describes is close to standard in many parts of the US (except 1N-3c), and I think it works pretty well and is easy to learn. I would add that one of the most important slam investigation tools is showing shortness, and most people play that after a transfer to a minor suit and acceptance (1n-2s-2n/3c(*) or 1n-2n-3c/3d) responder's 3M bid shows a singleton. This can help opener decide not only whether to prefer 5m to 3n with a minimum but little strength opposite responder's shortness, but also to investigate slam with such a hand and a maximum. * You should decide which of the two steps allowed by the minor suit transfer shows the "accept" (i.e. a hand you would have bid 3n over 3m on in your old structure) and which the "reject". As far as I can tell, it's about a 50/50 split of people playing it both ways.

See if you can get your hands on a book about "the law of total tricks". But briefly, there are a few things you should think about. 1. You don't mention the vulnerability. Assuming you think 4s is definitely going down, you only need to beat it 2 for it to be better than your game at white/red (meaning you are not vulnerable but the opponents are), but you need to beat it 4 at red/white (the opposite situation). 3 is right at equal vul. 2. The most important things to think when deciding to defend or bid on are a) the number of trumps (hearts) you and your partner have. With only an 8-card fit, it'll almost never be right to bid 5, with an 11-card fit, it'll often be right. b) the number of trumps (spades) you think your opponents have c) the degree of your secondary fit. If partner promised a side 5-card suit and you have a singleton, generally defend. If you have a big double-fit, generally bid. d) the number of honors in the opponents' suit. You mention the ace of their suit, but that card will actually be ok for bidding also. Kings, and queens however, are a big sign to defend. In general keep in mind that your partner is also thinking about the same things you are and may be better placed to make a decision.

I actually quite like the OP's idea -- I always wait to make a takeout double with the 4135 type hand and now they actually do compete to 3h sometimes, whereas fourth hand can rarely compete if we bid anything at all right away (pretty much needs support for 3 suits and some decent values). On the downside, you'll occasionally miss some penalties when their suit turns out not to be your short suit after all, and on a rare (becoming more rare the more values you demand for these 2M bids) occasion, you'll actually walk into a misfit and go for a number on that type of hand. The other downside for me is that I don't play against dont or capp often enough to justify developing a separate system.

What's wrong with 1n?

Given that we've gotten to this point, I'm not sure why everyone is taking it for granted declarer has 6 diamonds - partner hasn't pitched yet. Sure, the original problem's wording strongly suggested you assume this, but none of us would be anywhere near 100% certain of this at the table. That said, no matter how many diamonds declarer has, I don't see the layout where I'm supposed to pitch the ♣7.

A jump to 3n in these auctions typically shows 15-17 balanced, so that's perfect for hand 1. Double (takeout) seems normal enough on hand 2. If double isn't takeout, then it's an unfamiliar situation to me but I guess I'd bid 3s. Edit -- hm, just noticed 1s (or maybe just 2s?) was limited. Not sure if it's standard among strong club players to still play 3n as 15-17, but it seems like a reasonable treatement to me.

I think my style is quite different from most people's here. I would be happy to force to game with 3 spades here, so 3s can be a doubleton for me (NF). I guess I also don't usually bid 2s on any old 5-card suit (a 5-3 fit can still be found next round). I could see both ways on 3h being forcing or NF, but I play it as forcing where I've discussed it.

1. Two places to play; presumably 4♠ and a minor. 2. Both minors. 3. (Assuming I'm 2nd seat) 6♣, but probably wouldn't have passed 3♥.

To me 3♠ shows 3, a min with 4 bids 4♠ and a max with 4 can cuebid. Not sure I'd call it "standard", in fact most people I've met don't play this way. But it's the way that makes sense to me and doesn't seem to have too serious of a downside (you can't offer 3n with a 4-4 spade fit seems to be the only real one).

That is not universally true. Many play 1♠ 4♥ as a splinter which is analogous to this auction. Again the most important thing is that you are agreed with partner. Yes 1S-4H is the specific exception to that rule if you play it that doesn't involve bidding their suit. I would take 1S-4H as natural with no agreement. I would say that makes it one of the most hard and fast rules in bridge! By the way, 1S p 4H and 2S p 4H are in no way analagous. I agree, but I also think that 1s-4h splinter is very standard.

I've seen many an experienced partnership have an accident with 2♠-4♥.

I also tried to bid the way I would bid normally at the table. As extreme evidence of this, on board 13 (xxx xx AKQxxx Ax) our auction started 1♦ (unbalanced) - 2♦ (natural 4-9) and I bid a blocking 3♦. I also bid 4♠ over 1♠ on this hand.

I would just pass.

3♠ is probably the best way to get to the right one of 3N and 5♦, but I think it's so likely that 4♥ is right in a 5-2 that we should bid 3♥. We still have a chance of getting to the other spots.

my hero

Currently 10:40 pacific.

Ok, how about this Saturday morning/afternoon (Aug 21st), around 11am pacific? Thanks.

3nobob and I would like to bid tonight if possible. Around 11pm pacific would be perfect. Thanks.

I always thought that with a 4M-4m slam force playing standard you could just bid 1n-4♠. Is that bad for some reason? The 4-4 minors hand seems like an even easier 4♠. At least the way I play is that over 4♠ opener bids 4n with a min, and then all suits get mentioned up the line. With a slam invite you can bid either 1n-2♣-2x-4n or 1n-4♠.

Great, thanks much.

Anyone available to set it up for us tonight, sometime vaguely around 7:30 pacific? Thanks much.

I show diamonds. I like using 2M as a diamond raise, but 2d inverted playing "standard".