mw64ahw

My real life is different and for practical purposes GF is forcing to 3NT/4m/4M while 4♦ may or may not be forcing to game depending on prior bidding. In the above example I would view this as invitational only since with the requisite strength I would bid 5♦/move directly to a slam enquiry. I'm assuming that 2♣ is preceded by 1M, given that 2♦ would be negative over a 2♣ opening.

How about 2♠ Muiderberg if you play R20 rather than R19

In a club session where do you bid to for a positive score as either NS or EW? Will double dummy's optimum leave you positive? [hv=pc=n&w=s5ht65dakj642cq84&n=sj8742hk73d75cj73&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1h3s?]266|200|3♠ shows 13+hcp & 6+♠[/hv]

This was one of the reasons I moved to showing keycards & controls rather than asking for keycards. However In this case if you felt inclined to move above 4♥ then there are no additional Kings to show so a 5♥ bid shows KQ ♥ plus 2 additional keycards. North has controls in all suits so can make the slam decision. Perhaps it would have been better for North to bid 3♠ either denying a stopper for NT or showing a control for the slam try leading to: 3♠ - 4♣ implies KQ ♥(skipping 3NT) rather than 3 small (with Hxx I use Jacoby) 4♦ (♦ control) - 5♥ (slam invite no further Kings to show w. 3 keycards knowing that the ♦ control is in place) North's choice After the 3♠ bid South has the opportunity to sign-off in 3NT or 4♥

I use a version where 4♥ and 4♠ would be of minimum opening bid strength rather than purely pre-emptive

Is 4♠ preemptive or Namyats?

3NT looks good with a NT slam a possibility opposite a North with more than his shown extras. 4NT could start this enquiry. However, 3♥ to show an initial preference for ♥ (either 3 small or with honour(s)) as here may be preferable looking to play a slam in the Moysian fit or convert to NT later. Subsequent bids are then 3♠ - denies a ♠ stopper with a weakish ♥ suit 3NT - weakish ♥ suit ♠ stopper choice of games. 4♦ - 3+♦ GF given the extras 4♣ - 5+♣ with a singleton 4♥ -I have 2./3 top honours.

For those who don't enjoy a challenge or don't have the ability to adapt, a system can be too complicated. I've faced similar comments for wanting to play a basic 2/1 opposite UK based ACOL players.

Assuming North's on lead otherwise its 2/5♠

Hoping that N/S don't find the optimum ♠ lead to defeat a 3NT contract?

I can understand why East & West didn't open, but North? Time to find yourself another partner

Worth a shot with South's modified loosing trick count being 4.5 opposite at worst 8 giving an expected bidding level of 6.5.

I'm in the non-forcing camp. Opener has 4 options at 3♥ and above a) bid game, c) force , show c) additional length/strength in the minors or d) limit their hand with a simple raise. a) 3NT or 4♥ b) 3♠/4♠+ c) 4♣/4♦ d) 3♥ I have support, but not enough to make game opposite a minimum response. Bid game if you have enough; I'm not sure why you would want to play in 4 of a minor rather than major when support has been shown. I prefer to keep all 4 options rather than removing d) as a place to play

With extras I'm taking the slow route and bidding 2♠ first so I wouldn't expect partner to bid 3NT Anyway in terms of this hand the discussion becomes academic and who knows how a pick-up partner will interpret. What you have is my interpretation in a pick-up situation

I've nothing in ♠ & 3NT is unlikely unless you can cover

You could be in trouble opposite a Weak 2443. I still prefer to show the Strong hand with 6+♠, but would bid 3NT opposite with 8hcp and the singleton ♠. Partner can always correct to 4♠ with a self-sustaining suit. Otherwise with a 2♣ agreement available that's my preference.

With a pickup partner I'm reading after 2♥ Weak+ 5+♥ without any other agreement 2♠ I don't have 3♥ (may have 3 small ♥s) and I have no ♠ control followed by --2NT ♠ control/length not enough for game opposite a minimum reverse --3♣ preference 3+♣<4♦ possibly a weak hand with 2+♣ & honours NF ----3♥ 3 small ♥s NF --3♦ preference 4+♦ possibly a weak hand with 3+♦ & honours NF ----3♥ 3 small ♥s NF --3♥ 6+♥ no minor support --3♠ ♠ control/length, happy for partner to play the 3NT --3NT ♠ control/length enough for game opposite a minimum reverse --4♣ 3+♣ GI likely to be longer ♣ --4♦ 4+♦ GI likely to be longer ♦ --4♥ self-sustaining suit --5♣ 3+♣ signoff likely to be longer ♣ --5♦ 4+♦ signoff likely to be longer ♦ Alternative bids after 2♥ --2NT I have ♠ control, but not enough for game opposite a minimum --3♣ 6+♣4♦ --3♦ possibly 5♣♦ w. a strong rather than intermediate hand? --3♥ 3♥ not enough for game opposite a minimum --3♠ 3♥ w. ♠ control & worth a slam try if you have good controls --3NT I have ♠ control and enough for game opposite a minimum --4♣ 3♥ w. ♣ control & worth a slam try if you have good controls inc. ♠ control --4♦ 3♥ w. ♦ control & worth a slam try if you have good controls inc. ♣♠ control (i.e. heavy in the Reds) --4♥ 3♥ enough for game In this case 3♠/4♥ are the obvious choices with 3♠ being my preference. I wouldn't muck around with anything else regardless of whether its a pick up partner or not

I really don't get why this sequence is so difficult. West has shown 5♥ and a preference for ♣ over ♦ with at best middling hcp. East has the strength to take it to 4♥ even opposite a minimum. Personally I would have made the jump to 3♠ rather than 2♠ to show something better than a straight raise. With an Ace & a King in West's hand there is then the opportunity to explore further if so inclined.

Thinking about the problem further how about 2♠ as a reverse help suit game try looking for ♣s? Revert to 3♥ when ♣s are bypassed.

Thanks - I keep learning and like the underlying the approach. I'll aim to build out the structure and compare to what I use at the moment

I play something similar to below, in a Transfer Walsh context 2NT- --3♣ asks for 5m? ----3♦ waiting ------3♥ 4M denies 4+♣ ---------3♠ 4+♦ -----------3NT 4M333 -----------4♣ 5M4+♦ -----------4♦ 4M4+♦ -----------4♥+ GF/SI 4M4+♦ ------3♠ 4M4+♣ ---------3NT 2M(344) ---------4♣ 3M2oM44/3M2oM35♣ ---------4♦+ GF/SI 3M2oM44/3M2oM35♣ ------3NT 44Ms ----3♥ 5♣2M ----3♠ 5♦2M ----3NT 2M3oM44 exactly --3♦ 5♥ w/o 4♠ may have 5♠/6+♥ (weak suit) --3♥ 5♠ w/o 4♥/6+♠ (strong suit) --3♠ 6+♣4M --3NT 6+♦4M --4♣ 6+M4oM --4♦ 6+M5oM --4M 6+M (SI strong suit) This should enable responder to place the contract/invite a slam in most cases if I've got it right. Given your 1M is 8+points (hcp?) does this imply 1♦ is less than 8+ and/or no major? In fact re-reading your 1M denies 44M so this will free up the 3♣-3♦-3NT bid to show say 4M333 which in turn frees up 3♣-3♦-3♥-3♠-3NT. Maybe some tweaking to do.

Me too, playing an unbalanced ♦ or standard.

2♥ only for me 16/17 total points, 6.5 MLT at best. Opposite a weak responder you'll likely go down.

Try using this approach Advancing a Nebulous 2!C Response (bridgewinners.com) With SAYC the key is defining what is your minimum so anything else becomes GF. I use 10-13/14hcp with the good hand being 14/15+hcp, but will then GF when I have 13+hcp.

Whoops In which case I show 2 keycards with 4NT