mw64ahw

I would interpret 3♥ as probing for 3NT prior to looking at a ♦ contract so 15+hcp not balanced (probably something like 2452 or 3451 w. weak ♠ given opponents aren't bidding ♠) For me 3♠ denies the ♠ stopper/shows the splinter/mild slam interest with useful honours. Partner can then place the contract or further investigate a slam

Based on 'Hello' 2nd Seat X 15+hcp or a running minor i.e. AKQxxx(x) 2§ 6¨ transfer or 5M4m NV/5M5m VN 2¨ 6© or 5©ª Str playing strength or 5© Opening points 2© Both Majors 44+ NV/54 VN 2ª 6ª or 5ª Opening points 2NT 6+§ transfer or 55+ Both Majors Str 3§ Both Minors 3¨ 7+ pre-emptive 3© 7+ pre-emptive 3ª 7+ pre-emptive After a 2nd seat bid 2NT shows an Intermediate plus hand as per responding to a Weak2. 4th Seat X 6§ transfer or 5M4§ NV/5M5§ VN 2§ 6¨ transfer or 5M4¨ NV/5M5¨ VN 2¨ Both Majors 44+ NV/54 VN or 5©ª Str playing strength 2© 6© or 5© Opening points 2ª 6ª or 5ª Opening points 2NT Both Minors or 55+ Both Majors Str 3§ 7+ pre-emptive 3¨ 7+ pre-emptive 3© 7+ pre-emptive 3ª 7+ pre-emptive

I can see both sides of the argument For a 3-level pre-empt Red vs White I would need 7 playing tricks so following the same logic a 2-level pre-empt would need 6 playing tricks leaving this hand short. Conversely, using a disciplined Weak2 approach I was taught that I need 2/3 top honour when vulnerable. After Ogust this would be a good hand/good honours for me with 3 controls. On balance I would open with a Weak 2.

This is the sort of hand where playing an unbalanced ♦ can help and one of the reason I moved away from better minor. There are a variety of approaches, but my GI Esoteric Unbalanced ♦ makes life easier and removes some of the guesswork, so 1♦ (3+) - 1♠ GI 1NT 5+4+3x - 2♥ 4+♠ not GF 2♠ 3♠ - 3♣ 3+♣♦ Now opener is in a better place to decide on subsequent actions from Pass/Correct to asking for a ♥ stopper which can double as a control bid to setting the final contract. Without this it's a choice between 2NT and 3♣ depending on partnership agreement

It may be 12hcp, but it's a weak 12

Given you're potentially looking at the grand I'm cue-bidding 3♠ first rather than moving directly to key carding. The way I play; 3NT by North now denies a ♥ honour and 4♣ would show a ♣ control + a ♥ honour. If you get a 4♣ reply then 4♠ shows 2KCs etc.

4.5 playing tricks white vs red suggests that 4♠ is too much I'm more inclined towards 2/3♠

What would you use the 2♣ and 2♠ bids for?

A self-sustaining ♥ suit and support for ♦ with a slam on the cards requires a forcing bid. For me 3♥ is self-sustaining and forcing so I bid 3♥. I'm not concerned about a 4♠ bid as I will continue at least to 5♦ regardless.

I don't play this, but with a pick-up partner 3♣ is GF so North can either follow up with 3card support or bid 3NT with a stopper in the unbid suit Without 3 card ♠ support you should have 2533

3♥ is a competitive bid here given it will struggle to make opposite a minimum responder. On that basis I would not be bidding 4♣ as responder as the hand is a touch too weak for that

Instead of 4♠ being the key card ask, use 4♠ to show an even number of keycards and higher bids to show an odd number of keycards plus specific controls. This way the partnership will be in a better place to establish whether the grand is on if all keycards are there. After a 5♦ bid: Sign-off in 5♥ Bid 5♠ to show all keycards, but no Q♥ Bid another unshown control to show all keycards plus the Q♥ looking for the grand Sign-off in 6♥

If you show keycards rather then ask for them you have more flexibility. So 4♠ would be an even number of keycards and 5♦ an odd number with K♦, at the same time denying K♣

I play a simple version, no Last Train, no serious/frivolous 3NT. Simply skipping a suit denies control. If you don't have a control In a skipped suit sign-off. In contrast skipping 3NT shows 1+ honour if setting trumps or 2+ if declaring. Again if you are missing 2 honours sign-off. When it comes to 4X-1 4X-1 void 4X no control in 4X-1 4X+1 upwards slam invite with 4X-1 control On the above hand the expected strength of the 3♥ bid will define whether I start cue-bidding. Without interference Yes; with interference No if 3♥ can be merely competitive.

♠ in your hand above are a stopper/3rd/4th round control to stop ♠ running with the intention to play I'm unsure whether 3♠ asks for a stopper or 1st/2nd round control? I suppose it could be either given after 3♠-3NT-4♣ reverting to 4♥ would say stopper

Denial cue-bids (originally this was a stopper ask?) are fine, but whether it is an automatic 3NT bid depends on whether you intend to keep a 3NT contract in the picture. If not then assign a specific meaning to 3NT; non-serious, missing trump honour etc. so a suit bid then continues the cue-bidding sequence. Also perhaps denial cue-bids shouldn't be mixed with control bids, but I'm not well placed to comment on this practice

Neither for me 1♥ - 1NT 5+♠ 2X - 2♠ WJS 1♥ - 1♠ 1NT/2X - 2♠ SJS leaving 1♥ - 2♠ to be 4+♥ LR+ and yes ops. can X, but it's rare

Still 1NT as this is the Herbert Negative after a Power X over 1♠ If opposition have the points to X 1NT then XX says I have ♥ otherwise scramble for a minor; if they have a ♠ fit then it will tend to be bid, if no ♠ fit then they're unlikely to make 5/6 tricks in ♠

Partner tends to bid 1NT with 0-7<6♦ so I can Pass or revert to 2NT after a ♦ transfer

Screen too small can't tell the difference between ♣s and ♠s I double on this one (usually 15+); partner should then bid ♥ with 8+ and thence onwards to 4/6♥

These standard bids chew up a lot of space Assuming a standardish approach South has: a) 4/5♠ b) 2♥3♦ at best assuming a move to game with 3♥ c) no stopper in ♣ given the reluctance to bid 3NT d) Points are in the other suits, but could be only AQxx(x)♠ e) 5233 doesn't provide for much hope above 3NT I'm going to bid 3NT. If South is minimum and 4♦ is forcing you'll struggle in 5♦ and with more than a minimum 3NT is preferable when partner shows up with Q♦ or K♥ My agreements for this sort of hand are 1♥-1♠ (0-4 weak or 5+♠ GI) - 3♦ 14-16 5+♦ 6 modified losers or better with good suits 1♥-1♠-2NT 4+♦ strong allowing space to fine tune shape?

1♠ 11-21ish then according to system. I'd steer clear of 2♣ as the singleton K♥ weakens the opening a) 3♠ as I originally learnt b) later 2♣-2X-3/4♠ or 3NT over 2♥ c] my preference now 2NT to show 6(331) or 6x(4x) with 3♣ asking. Alternatively, bid 4♠ and hope 3♣ is also be worthwhile if partner is cautious over the length.

I play 2♥ as both Majors; usually 45, but OK with 44 on this hand

I don't use, but Quest Transfers are similar to Smolen, but GI instead of GF https://bridge.fandom.com/wiki/Quest_transfer

Yes, although there are various approaches. I play a non-promissory Puppet Stayman, but the original ones promised a 4-card Major I take the view that I would like to find all 8-card Major fits over 2NT so why not use the same approach over 1NT. The only key difference I have over 2NT is that 2NT-3R-3NT shows 5oM 2M