karlson

Why does this look so familiar?

How can you not double now? I'm not convinced I would have passed over 2h, but it seems to have worked out very well.

Why would you think you're unqualified? The answer is, you have a great experience and maybe next time won't feel like a fluke.

Playing 3d as a raise, I think I'm just going to call my hand a raise anyway. Second choice is a natural 4n over 2h, but I'm not willing to go past 4h with this hand. Playing 3d as a generic force, it seems that 3s over 3h should be a cue for hearts, so I'll do that. I play it both ways (with different partners).

I really don't get all the griping about MP. Surely a pair that is significantly better than the rest of the field is going to be fine regardless of the format? I'd be really happy with the fact that random gifts won't account for 20 imps myself. By far the best aspect of having it online is that people who would never normally spend the money and time to come out to DC or whatever for the trials are going to have a chance to play. Who cares if they have no shot at winning, at least they get an idea of the level they would need to get to, and maybe some of them won't think it's a hopeless endeavor.

Since I'm not going to let partner out below game anyway, I might as well try 4♥ now.

That there is a very large disparity between KQJx and xxx. Well I can see that, but there is also a big difference between x and xxx. E.g. on your suggested auction, I can't see partner stopping with Jxx Ax Kxx AQxxx, whereas I think over 4♦ he will do the right thing most of the time. I'm not convinced. 3♥ followed by 4♦ really makes it clear we have no club help, so partner will not be excited about the AQxxx (maybe we have something like AQTxx KQxx AJx x?), whereas 4♦ does suggest something in clubs, so partner may well think Jxx Ax Qxx AQxxx is gold.

You could play for a crisscross. Come down to edit: nonsense. Sorry, the crisscross doesn't work. My bad.

Sorry, 2♥ showed weak 2 strength, I could have specified. I think we should play 6-key on this auction, but we definitely weren't playing that, so I blasted 6♥ too. Everyone gets to move to partner's seat for an awesome play problem. [hv=d=s&v=b&n=saxxxha8xxdaxxxca&s=shqj97xdxxckj97xx]133|200|Scoring: IMP ♦Q lead[/hv]

♠Axxx ♥Axxx ♦Axxx ♣A Partner r/r 1st opens 2♥ showing 5-5 (or more) with hearts and a minor, You try 2n and partner bids 3♥ showing a max with clubs. You don't really have any further agreements here, but if you think something is standard, partner will probably be on the same page.

I don't get it, can't you now just knock out the club and claim because they can't lead spades? I always feel very sheepish enforcing the revoke to make an impossible contract, but hey, it's part of the game.

Even if they psyched, opener might well not be off the hook yet when 3c comes back to responder.

It's normal to pass on such hands, given your spade length and only moderate strength. If partner had a slightly better hand with spade shortness, which is more or less what you need to make a game, he should double. It's true that you can make 3♥ on this hand, (even 4 with a friendly lead and some inspired guessing), but usually when that is the case, 2♠ will be going down. The fact that it makes on this layout is rather unlucky (they don't always have a nice secondary club fit). I admit that some people would probably double with this hand, but there's nothing wrong with passing out a balanced 14 count in general. If you had an extra king, now game can be quite good opposite some very mediocre hands from partner, and you would have a real problem. I would imagine you would get some votes for both double and 2N.

I agree with Hatchett. If we play a heart now we can defeat it by force by splitting our diamond honors later. If declarer is 2-1 in the majors instead of 1-2, we never had a chance (but he's supposed to not have a heart control). However, pretty much anything works if declarer plays us to have started with 3 diamonds. I'm more impressed with the declarer play at the other table if they read the position and played for the trump coup (or stuck in the 9 if we didn't split).

Playing standardish methods, I would just show the south hand as 22-24 balanced. I'm not sure what north would do, but I'm pretty sure I'd be in 6♠.

Welcome to the forums. I would open 2♠. The spots are just barely good enough for me for r/r 1st. 4n is keycard for me. I can't imagine partner, without any discussion, meaning it as anything else. Besides, it looks from our hand like he could have stiff heart and solid clubs. I'll answer keycard and wouldn't be surprised if we get to 7.

Great! My intuition was that even 2m should be forcing, but that seemed non-standard ;)

Suppose you play a 2+ 1m opening. (e.g. precision, or some system where all balanced hands open 1c). You're more likely to have one minor than the other if unbalanced, but 33(52) systemically open 1c or 1d. At some point it surely starts making sense to play responder's minor suit bids in competition as forcing. For instance, after 1m-3h, it hardly makes sense for responder to insist on opener's "suit" with Kx x AKxxx Axxxx or something. Playing a 5-2 when a 5-5 was available is not my cup of tea. So the cuebid can show a generic force (by inference, both minors) and if you really have Kxx x (Kxx AQxxxx) you bid 4m forcing. And I'm perfectly happy to sacrifice a competitive 4m bid when I need 6 trumps or something to bid it with anyway. Is there a standard agreement about this? Is there a level cutoff (e.g. 1m-1s-2m NF but 1m-2s-3m F). Does it matter if the opening is 1c or 1d?

To me, 3h shows a game force with more than one place to play, and no stopper. I actually have no interest in 3n on this hand, as it's easy to imagine 5c playing better even if partner has ♥Ax/Kx (something as mundane as QJxx Kx Axx AJxx. Trade a small diamond for a small club, and I think I'd still rather be in 5c). It seems right to bid 4c over 3h, assuming that's forcing. If partner bids 4d, i'll bid 5c, and I think I will get to diamonds if and only if partner has 5 of them. Of course if partner bids 4s I'll pass. If 4c is NF, I'll just bid 5c (either now or over x, I don't really know the difference without a clear agreement about 3h). I'm willing to gamble on game.

I don't understand responder keycarding and bidding 7. What's wrong with opener's round suits being switched? (or if he bids 5n, how is opener to know). It seems best to start a cuebidding auction and let opener keycard.

Over 3h partner bids 4c

You have ♠KQJx ♥AKJTxx ♦Q ♣Qx You play some mildly unusual methods, so bear with me. 1d-1h 1n-2s 2n- 1d was unbalanced, 5+♦ or (4441). 1N showed a 2c rebid (5+♦ 4+♣) (without 3♥ unless very strong). 2s was FSF (GF) and 2n was natural (surely 2h on a doubleton would be common). Basically in standard you would have had the auction 1d-1h-2c-2s except you have a few extra inferences. How optimistic are you about slam? What's your preference now?

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sjxxhkxxdajxcq9xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP p - 1♣ - 2♠ - ?[/hv]

I can echo Olegru's comment. Inventing (now absurd) conventions was definitely my favorite part of learning the game. I think Fred is significantly underestimating this aspect, especially if the game is taught to smart young kids, who have some experience with hearts or spades. I think if you're dealing with players who have never played trick taking games at all, then you should just start with whist or minibridge or spades before trying to explain bridge. I guess this is similar to what Fred has in mind.

Uh, sorry, I'm an idiot.