pbleighton

I agree with Gerben - raise with 4 and pass (usually) with 3. I do this is the first two seats too ;) Peter

Given the stated opening criteria, A and B only. They are reasonable 12 counts, in spite of their shape. For the other two, a 4333 11 count would have to be very unusual to qualify as not light in a 2/1 framework. Peter

"I think most Precision pairs play that the 2D rebid by opener denies a side 4 card major (with a 4 card major they'll start with canapè)." I don't think so - not those who follow Rigal or Berkowitz, anyway. A 1M rebid shows 5 always for Berkowitz, and Rigal will bid the 4 card major only if better than the 5 card minor. Peter

I also would have doubled first - and I voted too :P Pd will never believe you have this much if you overcall. Peter

You can quibble with 2S and 3C, though I think I would have done both at the table, but 3D gets 100% of the blame. It is telling pd you don't trust him. Peter

Double, and hope. Peter

4H shows what you have. I would trust pd to investigate slam if he has significant extras. Peter

The trouble starts with 2NT. 3C is much better - it shows the 6-5 hand. 3H is also a problem - it tends to show 7 or a very good 6. 4H isn't good, but is excusable in light of pd's misbidding. Peter

Given that it was Roland who posted this, I feel dumb, because for me, this is a VERY clear pass. Peter

3S. Peter

"Dont and meckwell would have the same bid to show the same thing." Not the way I play Meckwell, which is that 2C shows clubs and a major, versus clubs and any other suit for DONT. Peter

Double for penalties. Sometimes it's nice to have simple agreements :) "Pass I guess, double would be for TO concentrating on the minors." If double is the minors, what is 4NT? Peter

The auction thus far is fine, and I would pass now. Peter

4H. Forget slam, don't screw around. Peter

1S in most partnerships. 2S in "Chicken EHAA" :) I sympathize with a 2S bid in any system. Peter

A is clear. B is possible. C and D are clear passes. Not vul, I would bid with A, B, and C. Peter

"In fact, SAYC 2/1 sequences work almost as well as 2/1 game force sequences." I agree that you don't have to play 2/1 to have decent 2/1 bidding. With one pd, I play standardish (F1) 2/1 responses. Responder promises a rebid except after 1M-2x-2M, which is a minimum which wouldn't accept an invitation to 3NT, and is frequently 5 cards, and after 1S-2H-3H, which is invitational. All other rebids by opener are forcing, and all except 1M-2x-2y, where y is lower ranking than M, are GF. BTW, we play 10-13 NT. I play "club 2/1" with a couple of pds. I don't mind it. The 2/1 sequences are sometimes better than the standardish system, but overall, the differences aren't much. I don't like the forcing NT much, so 2/1 loses there. Overall, I think a decent "2/1 F1" system bids games and partscores a little better than 2/1, and slams a little worse. Matchpoints, anyone :P Peter

Yes to all. I agree with Justin that I would rather play 6S than 6NT in the first hand. One other reason for this is that if East has the CA, he is more likely to lead it in a suit contract. This overrides the extra 10 points at matchpoints, IMO. Peter

Do you agree with 2S? Yes. Would you make a move with 4H or sign off in 4S? 4S. I hate not cooperating, but: minimum, misfit on clubs, and only 3 spades. Peter

4H. I could live with 1H or double. Peter

Chamaco: I play Precision with 14-16/10-12 also. I assume you now bid 2C with 5C4M routinely. How does this work out for you? Peter

- Would you have started with 1D as well? (Don't start about MisIry, it's too easy to find the right contract with that anyway) No, I start with 1S, and if I get a 1NT response, jump to 3D, and rebid 4D over a 3NT rebid. I don't think 1D is bad, however. - Do you agree with 3♥ followed by 4♣ to find out about a ♥ control? Or what alternative would you use? No, I would have rebid 3S. This shows a huge hand, and is GF. If pd signs off in 4S, you can respect that. - What do you think about 5♣? OK in this auction. - What do you bid now? 5S. 4C shows the CK and denies a heart control. Peter

Only 2S at this vulnerability. Any other vulnerability, bid 3S. Peter

Now it's tougher :) Pass, though double is close. 5D seems wrong at unfavorable. Pd has diamonds, but not much else. Peter

Double. Someone will undoubtedly explain to me why this isn't obvious at MPs <_< Peter