Kalvan14

3♣ should be this hand. Given your explanation, it should not deny 5 hearts, and it is still invitational. Pard, with a maximum, might try 3N, or give a delayed raise in hearts (I would expect that he would raise hearts at 2nd round with a 1-3-(4-5), but 3♥ might come from Ax). Pard needs aces, though, to go forward

Preference should not be important here (a clubs return stands out), so pard should have 4 spades (and declarer 2). The risk in playing clubs is that declarer might have Tx. I return Q♦

Since spade is so obvious, where is the sting?

3NT. The shape is right, and I have my stopper (which is also 25% of my wealth), and it requiress just 9 tricks for the game. Pard might even have a secondary honor in clubs, and it's likely that E/W hands can be severed. If pard has a red 5-5 will bid again, but going for 4♥ is masterminding. OTOH, if clubs are split 3-6-2-2 (starting from S), I'll loose the first 3 tricks, and I doubt I can make the rest of them.

Further analysis on declarer's play: if his hand is x AKJxxx xxx A9x, drawing exactly 1 round of trumps before playing the singleton spade succeeds in finding the only loosing strategy :)

IMHO, 99% would double for t/o with AQxx Jxx KJX Kxx. While the posted hand is not exactly the same, I'd submit that there is a 3-card fit in any suit, and the hand strength is reasonable. The problem is that if you don't double at the first opportunity, you'll never have an opportunity to show your values (doubling after (1♣)-P-(1♥)-P-(1N) is like playing russian roulette: may give a thrill, but it is not survival-oriented). I strongly disagree with the idea that E might overcall 1♥ with 1♠: pre-emption value zero, lead value uncertain (if oppos end up playing in NT, do you really want a lead in spades?), infos conveyed to partner minimal (ok, I've probably 5 spades, and maybe something between 4 and 17 points). Even a balancing with E hand (which is less outrageous than an overcall) is predicated on partnership agreements: if partner passes with clubs values and a balanced hand weaker than a strong NT...).

If you have a Mujderberg option, it's fine. Otherwise, better to pass.

Partner is asking for a club return, otherwise she'd have played small diamond rather than the ace. When she takes the spade ace, my count should be true: she should know that declarer has 2-6-2-3 or 2-6-3-2. After ruffing the 3rd round of clubs, everything is clear, and the only way of beating 2♥ is making declarer misguess the trump suit. Declarer's play does not make much sense, in particular at IMP: with either 1-6-3-3 or 2-6-2-3 he should cash AK in hearts, and 8 tricks are there. Playing as he did, he gave defence a chance.

Like all very descriptive bids, Raptor should be limited in strength. The more defined the hand is, the better partner can assess the combined values, and pre-empt (or anyway reach the best level). Alternatively, I could see raptor as similar to 2-ways Michaels: weakish, or very strong (but not intermediate)

It's what I have always argued: FTL methods are quite good if you can properly assess the WTP (and the SST, but this is much easier). Obviously, if you can properly assess the WTP, you do not need FTL methods.

3♣ is quite enough with South hand. In the end, North has to make a decision (after 4♠, not after 3♠). North has a good distribution, and adequate shortnesses; the two defensive tricks are likely not to be enough to defeat 4♠ (W has opened, E has bid a forcing 2♠, how much can be south expected to bring?). 5♣ should be 2 or 3 off, with the promised club fit. It is not a mandatory sacrifice, IMO: S can have diamonds value, as it is, and 4♠ with the likely 9 trumps (maybe even 8) might be difficult.

4NT cannot be a request for aces (unless you want to postulate that someone who passed after 1♠-(3♥) can ask for aces (I'd not have passed, btw: the hand is worth anegative double, IMO, with the good fit in the minor and the tolerance for spades). 4NT should be a generic cue bid (certainly with heart stopper) in support of diamonds.

The best combined line (on a heart lead) is: A heart A diamond A club small diamond to the king If diamonds are 3-2, play a club toward the K (if W does not ruff), and ruff a club. If diamonds are 4-1 (as per the posted hand), diamond to the J, and ♠Q. This should give you the best combined chances.

The first case is certainly t/o. The second one depends on partnership agreements (and also if you play or not G/B 2N). The problem is when you want to compete, obviously: with G/B 2N, X should propose a penalty). Without it, t/o is more productive.

There must be a level after which the partnership is no more committed to a FP. Suppose the auction is 1x - (X) - XX - (3♠) - P - (P): are we in a forcing pass situation? You can have 2♠ instead of 3♠ if you prefer (and this might be quite a common auction): FP or not?

Pard rebidding 2N is not just convenient, it's great :lol: How about 4♣ now? It shows an autonomous suit (and as I play it is RKC)

Quote "1x-1M-any-3M : GF and 6card M" Unquote Unusual treatment: would it not be easier to use NMF or FSF? The standard treatment for this is invitational.

Who has the aces? to make 3N, pard need at least 2.

It the 4NTs are quantitative (as they should be, and as everyone here agrees), it would be very unusual if the 4NTer had not a good stopper in hearts. I missed the thing about "pick-up partner" at the beginning, though. Call me chicken, but I will not have the confidence to pass 4NT.

I play 4NT quantitative, after an auction: 1♦-1♥-2♦-3♣-3♦ 3♣ is 100% GF, and, in my partnership, 4♦ is RKC agreeing diamonds. 17 HCP, and a singleton in diamonds, true. Still, it is a very nice hand with a lot of controls. Pard has a maximum for his bid, and will accept the slam try with 6♦. I will most likely convert to 6NT, to protect my honors. IMHO, 6♦ or 6NT can be bid (and they are not bad slams, depending only on an even distribution of diamonds. I will never end up playing 6♣, which in any case is an inferior slam.

2♥, for me [3♥ would be a splinter in support of clubs]. I do not play Gerber in such an auction (Gerber only during NT auctions witout fit; 4♣ here would be a RKC agreeing clubs). IMHO, even if I played Gerber, I'd not use it: if pard has 2 aces, which ones are they? The ♥A is worth 1 1/2 times the ♦ or ♣ ace. Over 2♥, the worst possible rebid from pard would be 3NT (concentration in diamonds and clubs): 4♠ should convey the right message (strong suit, interest in slam). Over a rebid of 3♣, or over 3♦ FSF, 3♥ [to be followed by 4♠. If I find a fit in either major [which is quite possible], 4NT is what I need to check the KCs. There should not be any risk: if pard has aces, he knows they are good cards against my 2-suiter. If he has kings, better to avoid the 5-level

Regardless of whether this is part of Meckwell Club, it is decided NOT Lebensohl... I do play a similar treatment: (2M)-X-(P)-3 any (excluding only 3M) is natural and forcing; passing through 2NT, puppets pard to bid 3♣ (but, since the double is unlimited he can refuse the relay, obviously) and shows a weak hand. The same thing happens when the bidding is: (1M)-X-(2M): 3 any is forcing, 2NT puppets 3♣. I always describe it as "Lebensohl after 2M". Finally, I play "Lebensohl after a reverse", where a raise is forcing, while advancer bids 2NT to indicate a sub-minimum hand, asking opener to bid 3♣ without extras.

That surprises me a little. I would have thought it's more like 11+, or very good 10+. I'd say that a good 9+ or a good 10+ is not really significant (I play 10+ without qualifications, so I'm straight down the middle). The important things are the shape, the fit with opener (or lack thereof) and the partnership agreements (XX is forcing up to?)

If the bidding goes (1♥)-X-(P)-2♦-(P), I am going to pass too. This auction is quite unlikely, though: if the oppos do not fit in hearts, why pard did not bid 1NT? The auction might rather be (1♥)-X-(2♥)-3♦-(P), and I pass in this case too. Maybe the most interesting topic would be what to do with the posted hand when RHO opens 1♥. Not playing Raptor, I think I have 3 options: pass (and decide what to do when the bidding goes (1H)-P-(3H)-P-(P) bid 2C (good lead indication, but I'm likely to have to lead against a heart contract). Again if it comes back at the 3-level, I may be in a quandary. double, as I did. Not the perfect shape, but a reasonable one. And at MP it pays to get in sooner than later. I was ashamed to add the 4th option (1♠ :( )

The upper limit for a splinter should be 15 HCP, as per standard usage. Stronger hands can indeed be dealt with via J2NT or 2/1. I would never splinter, even within the agreed range, with a hand including a significant suit (KQxxx, but also AKJx). I've been playing splinters for a lot of time. Now I'm reversing my approach, and going more and more for fit-showing bids.