karlson

I would think pass is forcing (assuming 3c was gf), and then double is completely obvious with aces and a singleton in partner's suit. If it was not forcing, I think I would double anyway, but it's not as clear (partner might play me for more values than I have). I agree that 3c was a slight overbid, but it's easy to see a negative double working rather poorly as well.

I have one suggestion that deals a little bit with all the points you bring up that I'm sure will be echoed in some form or another. Play a lot of hands and don't worry so much about the bidding. Hopefully in this way you will get some idea not only of the amount of high cards you need to make a contract, but also of the power of a big trump fit, or of a very distributional hand. There are two hard parts of bidding. One is simply learning the standard language (what does it show to partner if i bid 1nt, how do I tell partner I have spade support, etc). The other is evaluating your hand, (now that I know partner has 12-14 with 4 spades, what do I want to play). The first is the part that many books will concentrate on, and in some sense it's easier -- you can learn a few rules and memorize some sequences and start bidding the way that a lot of experts bid. However, the second, which is arguably more important, is impossible without having a good sense of how the play of the cards will go.

Why don't we bid 3♥? Surely this is pass/correct. That way at least partner can bid 4m when lefty bids 3♠ now, as he surely will, given that they rate to have 9 or 10 spades. (I don't think partner should be balancing with significant spade length). I think maybe the best reason not to do this is that they could easily be wrapping 4♠ and we're about to push them there.

I guess it's coming to a vote, so I'll throw one in for takeout. I'd say the same for 1n opener.

w/w, swiss teams (imps, short matches). [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sj9xxhtxdkj9xxxcj]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 2♣ - p - 2♦ - x p - p - 2♥ - p 3♣ - 3♠ - 6♣ - ? 2♣ was precision, 6+ or 5+4M. 2♦ was asking. 2♥ showed a GF with 6+ hearts. You're pretty sure that partner means 3♠ as spades and diamonds. You're not the most regular partnership though, so it's possible that partner wasn't 100% certain what double of 2♦ was and didn't want to take direct action.

I think it matters not only matters how likely slam is, but how well responder will evaluate. In my opinion, it's generally pretty easy to reevaluate your hand when partner shows a singleton. It can be much harder when partner shows a side suit. As such, I would suggest a very strict definition on what the 4-card suit is. Sure, it won't come up as often, but at least you'll know what to do when it does. Otherwise, you just show the shortness and there's no reason to suspect you'll have a bad auction.

Ok, now that every single person is opening 4n specific ace ask. It seems standard to play that 5c is none and 5n is ♣A. Bids above 5n show 2 aces. a) Is there a standard way to figure out which 2 aces partner holds? Have you ever discussed it? b)Wouldn't the responses usually risk getting above 6 of your suit with the wrong ace missing? One partner wanted to play that 5c showed 2 or more, and then you could ask. It seemed too costly to not be able to play 5c opposite none, so we dropped that. Now we have the agreement that we don't open 4n with 3 aces missing. So alas I wouldn't use my 4n on this hand. Oh, and I've had it come up once. Partner opened 4n in 4th chair. Righty bid 5d! I had two aces and some other card, so I just tried 7n (it was club matchpoints.) The key suit was 4-1, so partner slid one off. Amazingly it was an average.

I dunno. One partner always bids 1♠ with this. I guess I'm still a a passer.

I think it's takeout, something like x Axxx AJxx KQxx or xx Kxx Axx AKxxx. I don't think the argument that we're unlikely to want to compete in any suit but clubs makes it penalty -- we might want to compete in 3c or defend 2sx, and partner couldn't compete to 3c by himself not knowing we have extra clubs. So takeout, but I would expect 3c to be the final contract maybe 2/3 of the time, with 2sx most of the rest, and the occasional 3red (we could certainly have 4-4 diamond fit).

Agreeing with what Adam said, I think it also depends on the overall strength -- if it seems reasonable to overcall 1M and double back in if the opponents bid 2m or 3m, then that can be the best option.

I was lefty, and led a spade, so 0-5 was out. I was very surprised when declarer, a decent player, very confidently played for them to be 1-4 (3s on a stiff) and not 4-1. I don't think this is actually a difficult problem. Partner demanded anonymity, sorry.

Your opponents are reasonably strong juniors. Righty opens 1s in third seat, red/red at matchpoints. You double, lefty bids 3s, and you end up being declarer. You're surprised to find that between you and dummy you have 8 spades, including the AQJT. How are the opponents' spades split?

A common agreement is that if the opponents bid only one suit, a cuebid is asking. If they bid two suits, then a cuebid shows a stopper in that suit, and asks about the other one. In your auction, 2h could be a number of different hands, but one of responder's first priorities is certainly to bid NT with a stopper. If you think about it, it really doesn't make sense the other way. I mean, if 2h shows a stopper, then what do you do without one? Bid NT?

[hv=n=sqxhakqxdakqjxcqx&s=sxxxhjxxdxcajxxxx]133|200|East opens 1♠, passed to north. If North cues spades, East will double.[/hv]

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sahxxxdkqjxxxctxx&w=sq9xxxhaj8xdackxx&e=shdc&s=shdc]399|300|Scoring: IMP 1♠-2♦-2♠-2N p-3N-ppp[/hv] You lead a small spade and partner discourages. Declarer plays the ♦K and partner shows odd count. You're up.

Partner shows 22-24 balanced (2c-2d-2n). You can show both minors (3S), a slam try with one minor, bid 5m to play, or bid 3n obviously. Hand 1. ♠xx ♥xx ♦ATxxx ♣JTxx Hand 2. ♠xx ♥x ♦Txxx ♣QTxxxx Showing both minors and bidding 5c over 4d would be a cue, so not an option.

I have this suspicion that one feature you have not discovered is the "movie" button. It lets you view your own result and those at the other tables that you're compared to, letting you see how your score is calculated. Basically like a traveler.

Vul. Lose 17, Win 13, 17/30 ~ 56% NV. Lose 14, Win 11. 14/25 = 56%

I'm thinking of auctions like 1N-dbl-whatever or 1x-dbl-rdbl. I'm under the impression that some people here play that they are forced to some level (i.e. pass is forcing) but double is takeout. I'm trying to understand how this works. For instance, what are you supposed to do if it's passed around to you and you have length in their suit?

Thanks everyone for the congratulations. This was one of the most fun events I've played. Wd team.

I'm still not sure why it's unplayable for the signal here to be attitude. Why can't we play low from J64, high from 64 and 654? Of course if we know we're getting in immediately with the trump ace, then we can try to make things clear. Speaking of which, why don't we just play the J under the K and then return our other one? Partner is forced to get it right now. I suppose this could be very bad if partner had 6 diamonds, but depending on my trumps, it might not even cost.

[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sajtxxhxdaj9xct8x]133|100|Scoring: IMP 3♦ - p - p - 3♥ p - ? [/hv]

You should probably mention that it was weak NT context. Probably doesn't matter much on this sequence, but people can get picky.

If Phil's criteria (2c=majors, 2M=nat) are a starting point, I should mention that I've been very happy with Meyerson (dbl=M+m either way, 2d=nat) for the last couple of years that I've played it.

I think my second choice is to texas and cue 4s (unless you play this as exclusion, but i thought jacoby then 4s was standard as exclusion, at least I play it that way). Surprised no one mentioned this possibility.