Blofeld

Weird auction, but I agree with Mike as to the meaning of 4♦.

I would probably bid 3♦ with the hand you gave. I think that holding a side 4-card major can be a small negative point when considering whether to preempt, and a larger negative point if the suit has values in (the loss you get is missed games), but if you decide to preempt it is then typically a point in favour of preempting higher, as the hand has extra shape.

A problem with this approach that hasn't been mentioned is that if there are 12 and 13 point hands which you aren't opening, partner must curb the top end of his or her third seat preempts. Which is going to make it a little easier for the opponents.

3♥ and 4NT on a normal day. Not bidding spades on the first. 4♥ is tempting at these colours, but the suit quality is verging on non-existant.

The agreement makes the double penalties, so I pass ...

The major problem I see with this strategy is that 3NT in 3rd seat isn't the tightly defined 'gambling' hand it is in 1st or 2nd - at least for me, and I'd thought for the majority of players who've considered the matter. All it shows is a desire to play 3NT. Partner will just about never pull it. For what it's worth, I bid 6♣.

3NT is my first choice, followed by pass. I think it's pretty close between the two and if you catch me in a different mood I might say pass. Double is a distant third.

3♦, for much the same reasons as Ben.

How does that secure 9 tricks? 2♠ + 2♥ + 3♦ + 1♣ = 8.

I pass. I have some sympathy for 4NT, but if partner has a good hand we'll probably end up going down in slam, while passing will get a bid from partner and then let us bid our hand. If partner has a bad hand, it's possible that 5round will be a good save, but it's also very possible that it won't be. Vulnerability does point towards bidding, but I don't think it's enough.

Lead-direction 2♦? :huh: Really I think this is a 'how many ♠s' question, and my stab at the answer is ... 6. It might be a good sacrifice against their making slam. It might provoke them into bidding a non-making grand. It might keep them out of a making grand. It might elicit a phantom sacrifice. It might make. Actually, the last is quite significant. If I bid 4 or 5♠ and it goes all pass, I will be worried about having missed a laydown slam. 6♠ might be wrong ... but it has so many ways to go right. 7420 is a lot better than 7222 here.

I don't like partner's double. I'd overcall 3♥ or pass with that hand. Reaching 4♥ is pretty easy either way: either I raise or I balance with 3♦, over which partner bids 3♥ and I add a fourth.

We bid to 6NT, on the slightly crude auction 2♣[1] : 3♣[2] 3♥ : 3♠ 3N : 5N 6♥ : 6N [1] Trebuchet, showing a weak 2 in diamonds, an Acol 2 in a major, or any 23+ point or game forcing hand [2] Diamond positive (asking partner to bid 5♦ with the weak hand and game-forcing opposite any strong hand)

4♦ feels right, even at MP.

4♦ at most colours. Not to say that I like it. Free suggests 2♦ playing standard overcalls - is this a typo?

But in the auction you're balancing they aren't going to get 1430 if you pass - they're going to get 680.

Doesn't that make them ... not cold for slam?

Double, even if 3♥ is invitational. Can't imagine passing.

is 2♣ ... 3♣ by partner re-4SF or a genuine suit? Even if you don't know for sure, your guess is probably better than mine.

Disagree with 1♥. I want to preempt on this hand. 3♥ seems about right. Having opened 1♥ and seen partner bid a preemptive 4♥ (I assume we're playing something standard?) then yes, I'll pull the double.

Yes, we had this problem this evening. It feels very wrong. Overall I like the new structure though.

I definitely open. Sure, I have a spade void, but I also have a 7-4 hand. Plus nobody else opened. Given that I'm opening, I'm torn between 1♣, 3♣ and 4♣. I think I would open this hand 5♣ in most seats, but not in fourth. I voted for 3♣, but currently I think I prefer 4♣. 1♣ is too much of a gamble.

I pass. I've been wrong before. Here, we know that there are a certain number of hands where partner will double and it is right to pull. Equally, there will be some where it is right to double. It's guessing which is more likely (along with the associated gains and losses: relevant even at matchpoints!) that's the question. My instinct here is that pass is better in the long run. I certainly can't know that partner is salivating, though.

If the opponents know what you're playing then tagging the alert box is a good reminder that it's artificial and takes less time than typing an explanation they already know.

My instinctive line: win, ruff a spade, pull trumps, cross to table with a diamond, ruff a second spade, go back to table and hope that either the spades are now good or the diamond Q drops.