Huibertus

I'd imagine that would be madness. A 1 ♦ is far too unlimited for a quantative NT repsonse. It is a 12-21 HCP opening. Would opener be expected to accept with a non minimal hand of 14HCP or would a maximum of 21 be the requirement? How would opening hand be expected to handle the potential two or three suiters with a void holding minimal values? 4NT simply cannot be quantative, you need a tight range in strength AND shape in order for that to make sense.

The robot system allows for a 3crd 1♦ opening. For you to jump straight into 4NT for keycards therefore implies a 5 card ♦. Norht holding a 5 card♦ therefore "knows" the combined hands hold 10+ trumps and therefore of course he promissed trump Q, + the 2 keycards it actually holds. I would do the same. By the way, you hold two keycards, how do you assess the combined number of keycards, 2+2 = 4 or 2+5 = 7?

That certainly is true. But the other side of the coin, the earlier you play clubs, the more difficult it gets for west to count the hand and work out he has to duck the ace as the KJ decision is for the 12th trick.

Take the lead in Dummy, play ♥ K, you'll see the 4-0 split. Lead a ♥ and cover cheap whatever East plays. Then lead a club and guess right if West plays low (not describing how to play if west takes the ace, it is similar). Then after ♣ K, ♦ to the ace, ♦ ruff, and lead the final ♥ for a repeated finesse. Draw the last ♥, cash spades and concede the last trick to ♣ A and Q. But please don't bid this slam, OPPS will think you have peaked.

True, but in part it also depends on how inflexible one leads 4th best of a 4 card. I would certainly consider leading the 2nd in this case, encouraging even the most wooden partner to switch spades if dummy looks like it might be a good idea.

Tough question. In reality I would lead ♠ Q, but ♥ might be better. If leading ♥, one should consider the 7. If Spade King does is not in Dummy and partner does have ♥ Ace, a ♠ switch would be very welcome and often lead to one off at trick 5, declarer having ♠ KX.

4♠. You must show ♦ support, and you must set up a forcing pass situation.

The best from Dutch "Dwangneurose" Dwang in bridge is Dutch for squeeze. Neurose is neurosis. Dwangneurose is the psychological disorder compulsive neurosis. It is a word used for the player always looking out for a squeeze even if alternative plays offer three times the chance of succes. I used to have such a partner one time, very tiring...

You are describing all the reasons not to play those coventions. Drury is usefull as a reminder that in today world an opening + almost an opening is not always game, but that applies to 1st/ 2nd hand too and is common knowledge. It's over rated and Bergen is the perfect tool for Opps to work out the best approach to leads and defense. But even if you do play them, if opps remain silent and Partner opens 1 spades, barring very few exceptions we are going to play the 8 card, and the 5 level seems about the right level if there is no way to get more information If you don't play Drury, bid 2 ♣ and wait to see if its a complete misfit or not and if Partner advertises extra strength or not. In a misfit without extra strength I might stop at 3♣.

Assuming 1st or 2nd hand, pass. IMHO the best way to gather information on this hand.

In order to almost be certain it is not reasonable 4♥ vulnerable, you need an opening bid for west on a hand like this; ♠ 7 5 3, ♥ Q J 7 5, ♦ A 9 7 5 3, ♣ 8 Do you? That would be pretty effective here indeed.

2♥ Yes, it's dangerous. But it is also the one and only chance to reach a 4 ♥ game. And that counts vul at teams.

You need to show your club support and invitational values with 2 ♦. This keeps options open, like playing a ♣ part score, a ♣ game, potentially 3NT, 6 ♣ if Partner has a better hand, or even 4♥/♠ if patner has a good major, short diamonds and shorter ♣. Double will work some times, but will also lead to bad 4 major contracts and a pass by partner in some cases where that will be the worst outcome.

Plain and simple overbidding. You don't want to be in any slam. Why would anyone pick up ♠ queen against the odds? Why would Diamond King sit over the Ace so you can park the ♥ loser that is almost always there? And then on the bidding, surely 3 ♥ helps a lot if partner bids 3 ♠. That is exactly the thing you want to hear, now being north you would be interested in a minimal value slam if Partner does have an ace, queen of trumps (and the jack if he has ♦ ace) and the king of clubs, that would be enough, in hearts you need a lot more, and you have the added risk of being down trick two after ♠ ace ♠ ruffed.

Well, the partnership has created a mess here. Introducing ♣ instead of bidding 6 ♥ would have put partner in a place to make a well informed decission. What do we do now? No idea we no longer can bring the message across how partner should look at ♣ queen, we have not given ourselves the chance to find out if he has ♦ K. Also, could partner have bid 4♦ as a fit bid? If so, surely we have to pass as 7 ♥ will go down if partner has too many diamonds. Furthermore, Partner gave a forcing pass being void in spades. If we feel bidding 7 ♥ is right we should have done so instead of doubling 6 ♠, that would have put the onus of have to make the last guess on the opponents instead of us. So what do we do now? I'd pass. I trust opponents will never redouble without knowing 7 ♥ is down, and assume they also don't redouble knowing 7♥ would be a cheap save. So let's hope they are not in bad strategy redoubles as those might work now due to our bidding.

Fully agreed this is annoying. You hover over the card you want to lead, prepared to clik on it, the trumps are moved on screen and by the time you click all of a sudden it is a different card...