cinvent77

Partner has 6♣ and 5♠ and is short in ♥. With only 6♣ and 4♠ partner should bid 2♥ over 2♦. With the double fit and no wasted values in ♥ we may have a good save in 4♠. If one believes this analysis, then it is probably best to follow it through and bid 4♠ directly as it puts the pressure on the opponents and takes it off partner. Of course bidding 3NT would invite a save but that is trickery and forces partner to make the decision. I bid 4♠.

Let me see if I can decipher all those negations ... :huh: NS play a weak two which does not have to disciplined = NS play undisciplined weak two's. But that doesn't mean that it is not disciplined = NS weak two can be disciplined. Right? :unsure: But a weak two on ace-fifth-nothing and a side ace in first position even when white vs. red wouldn't you consider that 'undisciplined'? :) Anyway instead of a take-out double a pass seems better. And passing your partners supposed take-out double is unheard off and suggests at least a partnership habit in a regular partnership.

I'm sorry if the question was unclear. I meant to ask what the minimum for the three different opening bid was. In this case opener had ♠AKQxxxxx, singleton ♥, void ♦ and four ♣. It seems to me that opening 4♠ is about right: a good pre-empt, 8 playing tricks, in second position. Opening 1♠ is not good I think. I saw that some responders raised to 6♠ and frankly I don't see why. Next time I'm going to pass again. Have to admit I prefer a more solid style these days :)

Mike: Can partner really have only 6 tricks in second position? Luke: Suppose you do play Namyats. Can you give a hand which opens 1♠, 4♥, 4♠? In other words what to expect as a minimum?

Your LHO passes and partner opens 4♠ white vs. red. After your RHO passes you give your cards a good stare: [hv=d=e&v=e&s=s10hak98dq1053caq96]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Back in your junior days your three quick tricks would mean that there is a slight chance 4♠ goes down for just less than a thousand ... Those were the days you'd pass lightning fast. Do you bid now?

Suppose you open 1♦. What do you bid after 1♦ - 1♥ - 3♣ - 3NT? I assume that 3♣ is FG in standard methods. Do you have a clear way to proceed?

Those are interesting points you raise, Hannie. I have never thought about it, but I can see the benefits of your treatment. Do you then play eg. 1NT - (P) - P - (2♥) - P - (P) - X as penalty? Based on this treatment West cannot bid 3♠ in this auction as the delayed 2♠ showed only four ♠. But what if East bids/transfers to 2♠ directly after 1NT? I'll look up the 1NT hand this afternoon.

I think that playing against a weak no-trump there are two concerns: 1. You want to pick-up some doubled part-scores as 'payment' for all the trouble they cause. 2. You need to be able to bid your games. In particular you need to be able to bid constructively with both majors. Point 1 means that one should discuss the meaning of various doubles, not just (1NT) - X. Since most opponents will run, one needs to know what say (1NT) - X - (2D) - X means. What about (1NT) - X - (2♦) - P - (P) - X? Suppose the opponents play transfers. Does (1NT) - P - (2♦) - X show ♦ or a hand willing to defend 2♥ doubled? As for point 2 I think bidding 2♣ with 5-4 in the majors is better than bidding 2♥ because of the 'extra' 2♦ bid. It makes it easier for responder with an invitational hand with 3-2 in the majors.

Thank you all for your input. Whether to play transfers or not in this situation is a matter of partnership agreement and not really my issue here. Bidding/transfering to 2♠ at the first opportunity seems clearly better now than my pass. It hinders the opponents, we may buy the contract at 2♠ or partner may be able to raise. On this board 4♠ is cold of course. Partner has 15HCP 3=4=3=3 with ♠QJx. Even worse: after my lead of ♠10 they make 3♥ as the club loser can be ditched on ♠AK. inquiry is probably right that there is no need to lead a ♠. Maybe we won't reach 4♠ on this board. Another question would be whether partner should bid over 3♥ or not ... Guess I have to find the hand for that.

Hi everyone! Tonight I scored a very round zero on the following board in an individual tournament. Hence: tree questions ... You're east in round 3 and pick up: [hv=d=e&v=e&s=s109742h3dk52ca654]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] After West [space]North [space]East [space] South [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space]pass [space] 1[cl] 1NT [space] pass [space]... I decided to pass. 1. Is 2♠ better? West North [space]East [space]South [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] [space] pass [space] 1[cl] 1NT [space] pass [space] pass [space]dbl pass [space]2[he] [space]... I bid 2♠. 2. Do you agree? West [space]North [space]East [space] South [space]- [space] [space] [space] - [space] [space] [space]pass [space] 1[cl] 1NT [space] pass [space] pass [space] dbl pass [space]2[he] [space]2[sp] pass pass [space]3[di] [space]pass [space] 3[he] all pass 3. What do you lead? Thank you for your help. Vincent BTW: What is the most convenient way to make bidding diagrams? Perhaps there is some thread on this which I missed.