Kalvan14

I'm personally fond of opening in 3rd/4th seat with 14 points, in particular without spades. I'd expect it is mostly a matter of style. In the particular case, MP and weak field, I'd be in any case unwilling to go against the field. Why open something that the rest of the field will not do?

Quite right. If you don't care to back all the betting, I'll be happy to take a share :lol:

I would open 1♦, at any vul/any type of game. Easy rebid, tolerance for majors. WTP? Obviously if it is posted here, there must be a problem :lol:

Funny tactic. IMO, bidding 1♠ can possibly have some merit (if pard does not raise to 3 or 4 ♠; and if the bid does not go as it did, with the last opponent doubling with good spades). OTOH, if one starts messing around, shouldn't be surprised if the partner rebids 1N (which I'd do 100 times out of 100 with the posted hand). IMHO, if you had clubs and diamonds exchanged, and you rebid 2♣, the pro would have complained that the bidding was a strong indication for 1N rebid :lol:

Double. It is true that our best game is likely to be in hearts, but I do hate overcalling at 2-level in such a poor suit. Pass is out of the question. My (distant) 2nd and 3rd choices are 1N and 2H

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sk9875h6dakt6ckt8&s=saqj42hqt5d92ca93]133|200|Scoring: XIMP 1S - (P) - 2D* - (P)- 2S - (P) - 4H** - (P) - 5C - (P) - 6S - all P *: GF **: shortness [/hv] The bid can be criticised, but in the end you have to play 6S. Lead is ♦8

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=saj854ha964dt3c65]133|100|Scoring: XIMP P - (P) - 2H* - (3C)- P - (3N) - all P *: at least 4-4 in the majors, 6-10[/hv] What's your lead?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skhktxxdakqxxxcak]133|100|Scoring: XIMP[/hv] The choice is between 2♣ (semi GF) or 1♦. No strong club, pleeeeease!

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sakxxhaqxxdtxcqtx]133|100|Scoring: XIMP 1N - (P) - 2H* - (P) - ? *: transfer to spades[/hv] Do you privilege the point count or the quality and the fit? 1N: 15-17

2♠ is horribly pessimistic. 4♠ is likely the contract I will have to play; I'll bid 3♠ not to hang partner.

2♠ at 1st round, no doubt. When 3♥ comes back, unfortunately I've to pass: too many losers for pard to fill

2♣. I can probably be back later bidding my spades. The only alternative is not double, but rather 3♣ (single suiter, ok, but much better pre-emption). Still, vul I would bid 2♣

I play 2♣ GF over 1♦. The hand posted is an absolute minimum for a GF: I would prefer 3♣, invitational (and this hand would be a maximum for that bid). Assuming that 2♣ is not 100% GF (but promises at least one re-bid) S is right in passing. The hand is minimum, and a direct 3♣ promises some extras (it would make sense to use a good/bad 2N in this sequence: either an absolute minimum with clubs fit, or a weak diamonds single-suiter - good suit). I would never consider 3♦, either directly over 2♥ or after the balancing double. Over the balancing double, the first impulse would certainly be to pass. alternatively, 2NT, with the good heart stopper. This is a hand where 3NT is good because all stoppers are aces.]

4 hearts are at least 95% guaranteed. I find very difficult to imagine a hand which is not worth a cue-bid, or a raise in clubs, and still necessitates of a negative double without 4/+ hearts.

X then pass for me. I agree with justin, on all and every point.

I would have passed. Even if there is a slam, it's a bit difficult to get there, and there is no certainty you are going to make it. 1♥X is 3 off, which is a good one, in any case. If I choose not to pass (say with worse intermediates) I prefer to bid 1♠, though. It is the most sure fit, and I don't want to crucify partner if his double comes from 4-1-3-5 (not to say from 4-2-2-5, which is a possibility). I'm bringing a honor in spades, 1 A and ruffing values in clubs. Iwould not refuse playing 4♠ in a Moysian fit, if partner is strong enough

Nor to me either.

The risk of opponents finding a defence in clubs is not my foremost fear, at equal vul. IMO, 5 trumps (with the ace) and another 5-card suit plus a void are enough to splinter (which would allow partner to better evaluate the potential of his hand). Btw, the ambience looks favourable for taking every opportunity to bid your hand, rather than mastermind the final contract: weakish club field (so even a bad hand would not compromise your chance to win - and even if you do not win a club event, is your pride so hurt?), and no particular pressure (I might accept 4♠ under the hammer in a major event, or if you have an headache).

I would assume that 3♠ (certainly forcing) shows either a tolerance for hearts or a very strong hand, which would rebid a different suit. Or both, possibly. I would also assume that partner is capable of evaluating the trick-taking potential of his hand: if the 2♥ comes from Jx KQTxxxx x xxx, it's not difficult to bid 4♥. I will go one step further,, and say that if you change a small club with a small spade, the contract is still 4♥. If his hand is xxx AQxxxxx x Kxx, I would not like to play 4♥. In a good evening, 3♠ might attract a 4♣, but I am not going to look for an impossible slam: IMHO, after 2♥-(3♦), bidding 4♥ means taking an unnecessary inflexible position, .

Bidding at matchpoints is also more attractive if the opponents are not vulnerable. I'd not be so sure N/S hold the balance of strength. 3♦-1 (or even -2, undoubled) would still be better than 3♣ making

Good players always find the Italian style more productive and flexible. Weaker players will be more comfortable with a rigid "1st cue-bid shows 1st rank control" style.

1C-(1N): I'd double. We have the majority of the points, a natural attractive lead in hearts 1C-(1N)-X-(P): with the posted hand I would pull to 2C. Nothing to be ashamed of, I'd open this hand: OTOH, it's not the right hand to defend 1NX 1C-(1N)-X-(2D)-P-(P): I'd balance with 2H Pard would not open a marginal hand 1st to bid and vuln; however he might open a light distributional hand (and in such a case I'd expect to pull). I'd be the most surprised person in the world if it were a psyche.

Pass at IMPs. 3♦ NV at MPs.

I played WJS for years (in a 2/1 system), but in the end got convinced that they are not the best way to go. Now I play JS over a minor criss-cross style (except 1♦-3♣, which is invitational with clubs only), and JS over a major are always raises of different kinds.

By finding the 2 red Js in partner's hand No way I'd pass this hand: double, and then 2NT