Kalvan14

The first comment is correct, but I fail to see why it would be applicable here. The second one is a first-in-life. I don't like 2♠; 3♦ would be fine, if pre-agreed. Without the agreement, 3♠

4♣ must be forcing also to lighten up the burden on 4♦ (which, in standard usage certainly agrees hearts). Why should anyone be willing to put all the slam tries into a single bid (4♦) just to keep the (remote) possibility of stopping on a dime in 4♣? Provided that there is a clear agreement on what is the range for 4♣, obviously.

Playing Walsh style, it must be a support double. If pard has hearts and a strong hand, she'll show them.

Tough one. At MPs, a pass is very attractive. At IMPs, the risk outweighs the possible gain. My preference would be 2N, but 3♥ is very close. It's quite possible that pard has both red kings, which would be best for 2N.

4♦ certainly agrees hearts, and is a slam try. As very often happens, it is a crowded auction, and pard does not have a lot of options available. IMHO, 4♦ does not promise a control there. Why should the weaker hand assume captaincy, and ask for KCs? The best bid is 4♠, accepting the slam try, and promising a control.

It is clearly a double. The only reason to pass would be playing with a less-than-competent (where competent does not equal world class or expert), casual partner. If this is not a casual partner, double: even if pard pulls with the wrong hand, it's a good opportunity to discuss high-level take-out doubles.

I do agree with Justin, 100%. And N does not have a 4♠ re-bid (nor a 4♣): 3♠ is just right.

Why should pard bid 1N with a singleton heart? 1N is a positive answer. At MP, no doubt at all: 2♥, competing for the score.

4♠ should be natural. 4NT should be a general slam-try in clubs. Overall, I'd go for 5♦. It is not the "optimum" bid, but the auction is very cramped.

Badmonster has expressed my feelings too. I'll miss you too, Justin: come back

Well said, Mikeh. I also choose 3♦, and 4♣ afterwards (which implies a spade fit). The advantage of 3♦ over 4♦ is that you find is pard has wasted values in diamonds, and stopping in 4♠ is easier (and you do not give the message of a 4-card fit in spades). If pard rebids 3♠, so much the better: time for RKC has finally come.

If pard re-bids 3N over 3♦ (and it is the worst possible rebid for me), I'll bid 4♣ [obviously forcing], which should be easy to understand as good clubs, fit in spades and slam interest (and a shortness in diamonds, otherwise my first re-bid would have been 4♣). Pard's 2♠ cannot be from 4 cards.

It goes against my grain, but ultimately I pass. I do prefer to gain a lil a lot of times, than big one time only.

5♣, but it is not so easy; there are significant chances of beating 4♥, and going down in 5♣ too (most of the times that pard has hearts values, for example). Pass is certainly preferable to 4N (which is the bid I'll never make).

X, and then NT for me too. Mikeh's analysis is correct.

My choice would be a small heart. It looks the best suit to attack, and communications between dummy and declarer should be the weakest point in this hand. Partner should be clearly able to look at dummy, and return a diamond.

I've no problem with the 1♠ bid: often the doubler has just 3 cards in spades, and in any case best policy is normally ignoring the double. However, if you bid this way, the support doubles are strongly recommended. In the particular case, after the 2♠ raise, I would have bid 3♦ (invitational, and denying a 5-card spade suit).

I've a strong dislike for 2NT Jacoby, which IMHO is no more than a necessary evil, and must be used to cater with specific hands only (balanced or 3-suited hands, with 4 cards fits, and lacking 5-card suits or 4-card suits headed by 2 top honors). I'd never consider 2NT for the posted hand (why go out of your way when you have a perfectly good 2♣ bid, which establishes a GF, introduces a significant source of tricks and keeps the bid level low?). IMO, the slam should have been bid even starting with a (horrible) 2NT. If 4♦ is last train, opener has enough extras to keep the bid open, and in any case advancer should consider the 5-level safe. Best thing would have been to ask RKC after opener's cue bid (4♣).

I'd go for 3♠. Tactically, it is the best choice, and rates to give oppos a friendly push toward a (tragic) 4♥. If pard has a fir in spades, I'm happy playing 4 of them.

Since the poster makes clear that "2/1 GF", 2♣ is not an option. 1NT at 1st round. 3♥ by opener is game force now, but does not promises 5 hearts (and i think it should be unbalanced: 5-4-3-1 or worse). OTOH, 3♥ must promise a substantial amount of brute strength (as an aside, nothing worse that opener rebidding at 3 level on the strength of a good distribution only: this rebid is GF, and should guarantee 19/+ HCP. Otherwise it would be better to rebid 4♥, which shows a 5-5 or better). 3N, but 5♣ is close. Still, 3N should be the practical contract.

The first double is quite clear cut. E is a funny guy: no pre-empt, but then goes to 5♦ all on his own. Theoretically, he rates to have a 7-4 in the minors, but this is match-points. The only reason not to double would be if I knew E to be a good player. And even then... The second double is much less clear or attractive. I would not double.

Provided that you do not discard hearts on the spade run, and that you play the 2H when you win the KD. Almost worthwhile playing it at 1st trick, don't you agree?

Playing SAYC

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sa987532h5dj8ca65]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] An easy hand, and an easy question: do you open this hand? If yes, which is your choice?

Thre are two of us :blink: