Douglas43

Apart from 3NT another option is pass and await a reopening double, but the poor quality of our hearts suggests that we''ll only get one trump trick and might only collect 200 / 500, so I'm with gszes

Please remember this is the novice / beginner forum mikeh, your point about 3♦ cue versus 4♦ cue is interesting but it's new to me and I'm not a beginner or novice player

Again this may be down to familiarity with EBU regulations, but it seems reasonable to treat this sequence for alerting purposes like a lead-directing double of a cue bid, or of Stayman, or of a transfer.

It seems to me there are three options for 3♣, weak, invitational, or forcing. In pre-transfer days it was normally weak in the UK, as the only way to run to clubs from a weak NT. Now people transfer, so unless you are one of the few who don't play transfers, I think this can be ruled out as not adding value. That leaves invitational or forcing. Mikeh above makes a number of points about technical merit. I would add that frequency is relevant. You are more likely to have 9/10+ hcp than an 8/ bad 9 count

And they opened 1♠ with 4-4 majors? Seriously???

Agree with your pass at the end. Partner has good defensive values and should have doubled 4♠.

If you aren't finding inverted minors particularly easy, you could try playing 1m -2NT as game-forcing with support (in effect Jacoby in the minors)

Not sure what you mean by "No distinction is made on the basis of any other call except the the opening bid" but Acol meets 1 to 6.

It might sound an odd choice, but lately I've been playing the old-fashioned Standard-American style 1(suit) - 3NT is 16-18 hcp. This helps to cap other sequences ending in 3NT as normally 13-15 hcp. The high card power on these stronger hands means it usually does no harm to bypass a 4-4 major suit fit. This hand came up on BBO yesterday: https://tinyurl.com/yghaautq

Thanks pescetom, sorry for going off-track

On a slightly different tack, one of the challenges in BBO claims is that it's obvious how many more tricks declarer is claiming, but not how many declarer is conceding to the defenders in the process. As a defender when there is an early claim you may have to do a bit of counting. "Declarer claims 7 more tricks, OK, how many tricks gone? Ah, four, that means two more tricks to us..." before you start to look at the merits of the claim.

In either form of scoring I think making game is likely to be OK as we have 25hcp and no major suit fit, so no difference in approach. I'd win on table, play a heart to the 10, then play on hearts hoping for a 4-3 break. If I also had the 8 of diamonds and the ♥10 was ducked I'd be tempted to switch and play diamonds, but without ♦8 I'm just hoping for the fifth heart to stand up.

I'm very old-fashioned. 2♣, 2♣, and 3♣. Noting the lack of stuffing in the Heart suit, which militates against an immediate rebid of them. However, if I was playing the stated system, I'd probably rebid in hearts wherever possible because it sounds like false preference on a void could fix me.

If you play 2♣ as a not forcing to game, it may be worth setting a high level agreement that "we never play 4m in an uncontested auction". So 1♥ -2♣-4♣ is natural and forcing. This hand looks about right for that. Then pass 4♥ or 5♣. Anything else is a slam try with clubs as presumed trumps.

Well as I say I do have a vested interest because Acol/4cM is better suited to finding minor suit fits, while 5cM is designed to fit the scoring system (imo).

In this bit of Western Europe bidding 2NT with both majors simply doesn't exist, even amongst strong NT players. Why stop your partner from using Stayman as an escape mechanism with a weak hand and 5-4 in the majors? S J Simon explained why that's a bad idea in 1948. Without prior agreement 1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠ is a cheaper (than 2NT) way of showing an invitational hand with spades. It's been cited that way in the methods described for beginners /intermediate players in the EBU magazine, on the basis that it is normal for opener to bid 2♥ with both majors, so opener could have spades as well as hearts. As this is the novice and beginner forum, I'd definitely advise any such readers to play 1NT-2♣-2♥-2♠ as natural in line with that teaching. I play a lot of pairs and at pairs it is well worth having for the odd time that you only make 8 tricks in spades.

It might be worth considering your partnership stance on opener's position when responder is a passed hand? If opener is allowed to pass a new suit then it makes sense to raise opener whenever you sensibly can. If you still treat a new suit as 100% forcing then 1♠ is an attractive option (subject to all the good advice from previous posts). Your partnership stance might vary according to the positions and vulnerabilities in which you open light, and possibly the suit opened.

There is a recent discussion on "Bridgewinners" here: What does this bid show in standard 2/1? and what is optimal? (bridgewinners.com) Confession time, I'm Paul de Weerd, and posted the irreverent final comment

These are fair points and I normally play Ogust, but this is the beginner and novice forum, and I'm conscious of one or two people finding that the comments were too technical / complex New readers - "Ogust" is a system of step responses by which opener describes how many points the hand contains and how good the suit is 3♣ min points / poor suit 3♦ min points / good suit 3♥ max points / poor suit 3♠ max points / good suit

If the opening bid is 2♠ how about: 2♠ - 2NT (query -Ogust responses) 3♥ (bad suit max points) - 4♣ (advance cue) 3♥ cue - 5♦ (cue) 6♣ (cue) - 7♠ Mind you, at the table I'd probably just blast 6♠

In partner's shoes 2♦ doubled and made might be a sensible way of cutting my losses. It's not game. 2♥ X on a 4-3 fit and suffering forces might be really expensive.

I'd just add to smerriman's comment that 2NT is a way of helping you choose the right contract, if you are confident that you want to be in 3NT or 4 of opener's major, you just bid it

"Also, a final question was that, I kept making obvious mistakes (including cutting my bridges to dummy, playing cards in an order that allowing them to draw my last trump out causing me losing control of my hand, forgetting to cash a side suit winner resulting in 3NT= with 10 top tricks, etc.) which wouldn't happen as a textbook practice. How can I improve my performance as, here, it's clear that my bridge knowledge isn't missing, but instead I fail to perform to my best of my knowledge." I recommend "Golf is not a game of perfect" to other bridge players on this topic. We are all different, but these things have helped me: 1. I need a couple of minutes to clear my head before playing. 2. Accept that you are fallible and will make mistakes. Find a way of not blowing the next hand by dwelling on the first mistake. I set myself a realistic target number of errors per session and don't worry as long as I'm within my target. 3. I find it harder to concentrate online, so I have actually started to talk to myself while playing on BBO.

"Also, a final question was that, I kept making obvious mistakes (including cutting my bridges to dummy, playing cards in an order that allowing them to draw my last trump out causing me losing control of my hand, forgetting to cash a side suit winner resulting in 3NT= with 10 top tricks, etc.) which wouldn't happen as a textbook practice. How can I improve my performance as, here, it's clear that my bridge knowledge isn't missing, but instead I fail to perform to my best of my knowledge." I recommend "Golf is not a game of perfect" to other bridge players on this topic. We are all different, but these things have helped me: 1. I need a couple of minutes to clear my head before playing. 2. Accept that you are fallible and will make mistakes. Find a way of not blowing the next hand by dwelling on the first mistake. I set myself a realistic target number of errors per session and don't worry as long as I'm within my target. 3. I find it harder to concentrate online, so I have actually started to talk to myself while playing on BBO.

It's the tryanny of the extra few points at MP scoring. It would help if the minor scored 30 for the first trick and twenty for subsequent. Then 5♣ outscores 3NT and 5♣ + 1 ties with 3NT+1. Lower down, 2C= beats 1NT=. Mind you, I play Acol and have a vested interest (twirls imaginary moustache and cackles)...