hatchett

Rainer I don't think declarer will have Q9x ♣ for his 4♣ cue.

I also like 2NT on both hands.

Double. Not close for me.

Partner is unlikely to have underled ♠K. The ♥s are running. Declarer has ♣K. I will return a ♦ since I think the best chance of beating it is partner has ♦A. If partner has found a great lead from♠K, I will have to apologise.

2♣. Double should normally have 4♥. Why distort when you don't have to?

Not enough. I expect it to go one off most of the time, but there is some risk of it making.

Add me to the ♦ J leaders.

I give West most of the blame. I don't really like the penalty double of 3♥ but having done this and to then see partner pull it I would not sit 3NT. I have a hard job constructing a hand consistent with the pull that has 9 runners in 3nt where we can't make 5♣. For a start for the pull I don't partner to have more than 1 ♥.

1NT for me. Show hand type and doesn't promise a stop.

I like 3NT on 5, has to be the most likely game. If there are 3♠ opposite there is a stop nearly all the time, when there are 2 sometimes partner has the A orK and if partner pulls to 4!h I feel fine about it. I certainly don't expect to be double in it very often and would run anyway.

♣K and 2 ♦s are my discards

1♠-1NT 2♥-2NT 3♠ A useful adjunct in this sequence to play 3♣ as artificial asking opener to bid 3♦. Then a 3 major continuation is GF and 3NT shows a ♦ fragment. Then you can play a direct 3 major rebid over 2NT as NF,

A ♥ return does beat it on Gerben's construction. If declarer reads us for JTxx diamonds then he needs four entries to table, one to force us to split our honors, two to shorten his trumps and one to effect the trump coup. A spade return gives him his fourth entry and a diamond return enables him to pick up that suit for no loser.

Were you sober when you wrote this?

Actually it's a commercial for raising 1♥ to 2 with 3 card support.

Was this supposed to be sarcastic? Sorry if it passed me by but opening 1♣ is ridiculous.

The idea is you lead from aggressively from a K or Q against a small slam to try and set up a trick, which can they be cashed if one of the defending side has an ace.

What was the lead? I am guessing a ♥?

I would double on all three.

Keycard didn't tell South what he needed to know. He needs North either to have a fifth trump or ♠ AK. South could cue 5♣ over 4♦ and North would bid a Slam with either Axxxx AKxxx or AKxxx AKxx in the majors.

I would guess 2♦ was the Bourke relay, artificial GF. 2♥ showed hearts, 4♦ was a splinter.

I am probably going to regret getting involved in this since Gnasher is a rather better player than me but doesn't b also gain over d when LHO has QJ ♥ and ♦Jx or any 5 card ♦holding and also when RHO has QJ♥ and ♦xx or xxxx. I think if ♦ are 3-3 you need no trump loser. Now b gains over d when RHO has QJ♥ and d gains over b when RHO has H♥ assuming you play trumps K and another

I thought the idea was to make a choice based on bridge logic rather than guess the right answer!

♦ for me. Partner almost certainly has a long minor. If it is ♦s, a diamond lead may be essential to cash since it is a double fit hand. If partner has ♣s then our ♦K is pretty likely still to be a trick.

That's because you seem to think a R/W 4♦ pre-empt shows 9 tricks. I don't think it shows anything like 9 tricks.