joshs

For your birthday, I wish for you to misplace a king during the bidding, so you end up at the normal contract at the end. :) Happy Birthday!

Personally I think adam has it backwards. The claims from the forcing pass players were a. Gains on the frequent 8-12 hands, especially in slam bidding (Both the strong pass systems, and the Big diamond systems with intermediate 1C openers such as magic diamond, supposidly get there system wins from opening the intermediate hands in 1/2 seat) b. Mild losses in the pass and fert auctions. c. Bigger losses from the fert when red. When red vs white the fert passed out is rarely ever a good score. (Note: having never done a statistical study on this stuff, and having not played this stuff in serious competition, I just have assume these claims from the people who play this stuff are accurate. I do think that many of these systems are well thought out.) Yes if you play pairs with no agreements about how to defend a fert, you can get wins that way, but thats at best a short term system gain through confusion not through technical merits. the reason to keep playing it after people learn how to defend it is because you have enough gains in other places to make up for the loss with the fert. The higher the fert bid, the more descructive it is and the easier it is to penalize. Back in the heyday of FP, it was fairly common to see a 1D fert Vul (or even a 1C fert), but a 1H or higher fert NV. I think Burgess-Marsden played a 2C fert NV if I recall correctly. Todd's system uses a 1H fert, which is totally unsound Vul. They actually score better with it than they deserve, because most people don't understand that the way to defend this bid, at least when the fert bidder's side is vul, is to aim for penalties, and to pass out the fert when close. Getting 300's with no risk of going down in game will be good scores Vul when you only have a marginal game (say 12 opposite 12), and great scores when NV. Play a direct x as a strong hand which sets up a forcing pass where you can get blood.

weeeee

As Phil said, the 2H opening has those two "flaws." On the other hand, what it has going for it is: a. You show a moderately good hand with 6 hearts b. You put more pressure on the opps Having passed you really can't pre-empt with 2H later, since its much less safe than initially, so you are forced to bid only 1H. Also, partner might expect a different hand type (say 6H and 4S) if you bid 2H as a passed hand, so you probably will not be able to show 6 hearts in a lot of cases. On the other hand, you are really unlikely to get penalized in 1H..... Anyway, I have no strong opinion about pass vs 2H. In fact I am not even sure which is the higher variance action, although I suspect 2H is slightly higher variance.

I have always wondered......What/Whose name does an atheist scream when they are having sex? Their own? Nobody? Non-existent? :) Hopefully not the name of their other lover....

I wrote a series of articles some years ago on hand evaluation. I posted my first two here: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...=hand+valuation

Just for the record: AKxxxxx xxx xx x Is a clear opening bid playing our ranges as is: AKT9x JTxxx xx x (I would open either one vul, although the first hand can be opened a vul 3S, which has the virtue of showing the seven card suit and a hand about this good, so is a better bid) just not random 5-5 8 counts with scattered honors. (NV My minimum is about AKxxx JTxxx xx x) Adam asked me about ATxxx x KJxxx xx (or something like that) which is a slightly worse hand. I also pass KQ Qxxx Jxxx Kxx playing a 10-12 NT without thinking. Its just not a good enough hand. I never liked the 10-12 range all that much because the ACBL doesn't let me open it with Axx xxx KQT9x xx which is a much better hand than the 11 count I am passing. Given the stupid rules, I tend to prefer a 10.5 to 13 range so there are a lot less 9 counts that are worth upgrading (I still will open the Axx xxx KQT9x xx hand, the ACBL be dammed, since its just too good to pass when playing 10-12 NTs since the ace is closer to 4.5 and the T9 is at least another half, and I have at least another 1 for the strong 5 card suit, so this hand is definitely 11...) Adam and I had an accident a while back, when I opened: AKJ9x x JT9x xxx with 1S, and I got run over, when he wouldn't stop bidding with his balanced 18 count and 3 card support. Hopefully, we got our ranges down now. For the record, I think AKJxx x J9xx xxx falls into our opening bid range.... Anyway, hand evaluation is an individual skill not a partnership skill. So if adam thinks that ATxxx x KJxxx xx is a better hand than AKJxx x J9xx xxx, he is welcome to open it, and the results long term (or bidding with that hand vs passing with that hand) will determine if his hand evaluation skill is correct. Just for the record, KJxxx x ATxxx xx will produce game more often than ATxxx x KJxxx xx (DOES EVERYONE UNDERSTAND WHY?), and will do as well the rest of the time (and the KJ is a slightly better lead direct than the AT). So even though these hands are just as good as each other, you have slightly higher expected value at imps and even at mps, opening the KJxxx in spades hand than the ATxxx in spades hand.

Of course, who ever said I don't use distribution points??? God. I never said anything about my evaluation methods. I said, that using Moscito which opened all hands that are as good as a bad 4432 11 count (which includes some 6-5 7 counts) then ... If you need 45 Planc Points (whatever those are) to make 3N on average, RHO opens 3S and you are dealt a hand with 33 planc points, a balanced hand and a stopper, you should bid 3N. If the auction was slightly different: P-3S-? And partner's pass showed 0-12 planc points, bidding 3N on only 33 is now crazy. If you were playing TRex, where an opening pass is 0-4 points (any shape) or 15-20 points without a 5 card major and the auction went P-(1S) you do not bid 1N on a balanced 16 count. Partner usually has a 2-3 count. and 16 opposite 2 takes about 1.5 tricks less on average than 9 opposite 9. Your expected imp score for bidding 1N on a balanced 16 is about lose 8, and its probably a 35-40% action at mps (so not quite as bad) when NV, but a 10% action red....

A few points here. 1. I am not talking about my prefered style. I am talking about moscitio as published given its opening bid ranges. 2. The point here is that if partner makes a bid that is well defined, your bidding is not effective if you can't take advantage of it. If partner's 1H opening showed 11-14ish with 5 cards, you really do not need to be able to distinguish a 2344 5 count from a 2344 8 count. Both are too weak to make game, and both (probably) belong in hearts. These both can be lumped together effectively. You can also jump to game on a 2344 14 count knowing that you are not missing a slam and thus making it harder for the opps bid bid and for the opps to lead. On the other hand if 1H was 11-20, you need to have a way of distinguishing the 5 count from an 8 count and from a 10 or 11 count. If you opened all 10-14 point hands, then Pass is more well defined. If partner passes (0-9), and RHO pre-empts its crazy to bid 3N on a 4333 15 count. Probably -500/800 occurs more often than +400/600. And, further, when +400/600 was available, your partner might still bid. If You only opened 13+ hands, then pass showed 0-12, and partner is not as well placed since you are less well defined (a wider range). Conseuqently, he may need to gamble on 3N since he can make it not only opposite partners best possible hand, but opposite quite a few of partner's average hands. If you played 10-12 NTs, but never have a 5 card major in them, and the other opening bids promised 12 points then pass shows 0-9, or 10-11 unbalanced, or 10-11 with a 5 card major, then you are at a real disadvantage in the the P-3S auction. Partner is slightly weaker on average than normal, but has plenty of hand types which are good enough to make 3N. Now this is not a commentary on the work point count. If you used a different evaluation method and opened all hands with 23 zars, or with 15 pubics, or whatever if your partner's pass restricts his range, you need to take advantage of it. Its compeltely irrelevent if you are opening all 10 point hands, or all 8 AKQ hands or all bergen 18's or whatever the method. The comment is that if your system has the following GOOD system property, "that using system evaluation method E (assuming its a reasonably good method), if hand A is stronger than hand B using E, then you never open B and Pass A", then Pass becomes very well defined, and you should be able to take advantage of it. If there is a slight overlap then its a minor flaw, in that your pass becomes a little less well defined. (For instance in standard, you might sensibly open Axx x Kxxxx KJxx but pass Axx x KJxx KT9xx (a better hand) because of the rebid problem. This can be a sensible decision but it is not without weakness, in the effect it has on the descreptive value of your pass. Similarly playing classical KS, where you open much lighter in the majors than in the minors (my prefered style playing KS) has a major weakness when it comes to the meaning of Pass.

I was not advocating the auctions I presented. I was commenting that two virtually identical hands (I switched the club and spade holdings) had vastly different expectation of tricks at NT when the oppoents opened a 5 card major, than when the oppoents opened a nebulous minor. The point was that there are a number of factors that can influence the optimal ranges for bids. Most authorities advocate bidding 3N on 23-24 points (23 only with a good potential source of tricks) when the opps open, and your side overcalls 1N (as oppossed to the 25-26 normally required). This algorithm again over simplifies, since it ignores the difference between the opps opening a known 5 card suit (they will be ahead in the race to establish there tricks) and when they open what is potentially a 3 card suit. I was commenting that when the oppoents opens 1 of a minor, and your partner overcalls 1N and you have the kind of good 7 count I presented (5 card suit with some values in it, and a sure entry on the side) that blasting 3N is certainly a reasonable bid (you will have play opposite many 15's when the opponents minor is not 5 cards long OR when the opening leader leads something else not knowing it is 5 cards long). The values required for bids, changes as the information you have changes. If you are playing a light opening bid system like Moscito (the opening bids are 9-14, unbalanced, 5332's with a major and 9-10 are opened 2M, and there is an 11-14 NT) it is suicide to overcall 1N on 15's opposite a passed hand. At best partner has stuff and you break even with pass or x (x is safer then 1N if you have reasonable support for the other suits). With the example hand: QJx KJx Kxxx AKx a 17 count, I would probably overcall 1N anyway even opposite a passed hand (well maybe only NV its really close), but this is pretty min and I don't mind xing instead. Change the hand to QJx Kxx Kxxx AKx and I would x 1S, although I don't mind pass. And weaken it still to: QJx Kxx Kxxx AQx its not even in the range of a 1N overcall opposite an unpassed hand (15's are suppossed to have a double stopper, or a source of tricks-e.g. really be worth at least 16) and I would pass. If my partner has a stiff spade and it goes 1S-P-2S he will act really light with appropriate shape, having already denied having a ten count. With a doubleton, he will probably wait for 8-9 and the right shape to x in. Honestly, when the opps have shown a fit, this really is not as dangerous as you think. I think a 1N overcall on a hand too weak to make game opposite ANY hand partner might have, is dangerous. I mean why not just play 10-12 1N overcalls? The reason is, it doesn't gain that much when partner has stuff (partner will be able to act, and even if he doesn't, defending isn't that bad), and it loses big time when partner doesn't have stuff. Further it doesn't solve the problem of getting to game or not when game is in the realm of possibility. This kind of thing occurs all the time in bridge. Consider the auction: 1C(you)-(1S)-P-(P) 1N What does 1N show? 1N shows 18-19. It in fact shows 18-19 even if you are playing weak NT (some will stretch this to 17-19 which is fine). The reason it shows 18-19 and not a 15-16 count is not because with 15-16 you would have opened 1N. It is because partner is nominally about 0-6, except for some moderately uncommon awkward hands, or a penalty pass hand. You don't bid 1N because you like to bid 1N. You bid 1N because you a. expect to make it a fair % of the time given the information that you have b. still have some (although maybe faint) hope of making a game Without sufficient values, you may still be able to compete the hand, but you are best off competing in a suit rather than bid 1N when outgunned. If playing a weak NT, and you bid 1N there on 15's a. you will often go down a lot, and sometimes get xed b. you will not be able to handle the 19's effectively. xing and bidding 2N (or jumping to 2N which ever you play as weaker) will lead to frequent disasters when partner is broke and bidding 1N will result in missing games, if partner thinks you might have 15. This sort of adjustment to ranges is well known in a number of auctions (I cited in my previous post the 1C-(1H)-1N auction which has a different range playing a weak NT then playing a strong NT), but it is not well enough understood why the adjustment occurs, which leads the the "mistake" in the auctions opposite passed hands when playing light openers.

Please give me a layout? yes white on white at mps, not bidding 1N can be a loser when a. you can't make 1N or b. You can make 1N but the opps will bid it first and their are declarer's advantage issues. Its also a huge winner most of the rest of the time. Personally, a and b is a strong argument for playing 1N overcalls white/white at mps with a 13-16 range normally (as Marty Bergen advocates). My claim is you will score MUCH MUCH better on average overcalling 1N white/white on a random 14 count opposite an unpassed hand, than overcalling 1N on a random 15 count opposite a passed hand (playing light opening bids). If you want to do the second, you definitely should do the first. Its irrational to bid only in the second case when you have a lower expected combined number of points in the partnership (and a much lower maximum) than in the first case. What I am claiming is your bidding is totally inefficient if you have 2 ways of getting to the correct spot when you have 15 opposite 8 (you overcall AND partner balances for instance) or 19 opposite 8, and no ways of getting to the correct spot when you have 15 opposite 2 or 19 opposite 2. This is kind of like players who play takeout x's in the balancing seat, and penalty x's in the direct seat. You have two ways of bidding one hand (good holding over there's) and no way of bidding another hand (good hand, but shortage over their suit). At IMPS, you rarely ever lose 5 imp swings playing this style (ok if you let them play 1N with half the deck, and declarers advantage gives each declarer 1 more trick than deserved, you might lose 5 imps, but once again, maybe thats an argument for lighter NT overcalls, which is not my style, but NV there certainly is a case for it....). You often win 5 imp swings this way. You also often win 10 imp swings this way. I just don't understand the comment. Note: How much you have to adjust your ranges depends on how light you open in 1'st second. If you opened ALL 8 counts, I probably would want to adjust by 3 points. if your partnership only opens 1/2 a point light, I wouldn't bother adjusting by much at all. Also Note: Compare the following two hands auctions: Hand 1: Auction P-1S-1N-P-3N-All Pass Dummy: xx Axx QJxxx xxx Declarer: QJx KJx Kxx AKx You are not coming close to making this. Hand 2: Auction: P-1C-1N-P-3N-All Pass Dummy: xxx Axx QJxxx xx Declarer: AKx KJx Kxx QJx Here you are a mild favorite. Frequently a 1C opener is 3 or 4 cards, a 1S opener is never 3 or 4 cards (at least in the US). Consequenly, you need more values to make 3N when the opps open a major than open a minor. Further when they open a minor, you also have more options: you might be able to x, and you might be able to overcall a 4 card major. Admittely, overcalling 1N (espeically NV) also has more to gain since the opps might lose their 4-4 major suit fit that way. My main point is each of these factors (Vul, partner's range, the suit the opps opened, and so forth) should effect the optimal range for a NT overcall.... I mean if you hold KTx xxx xxxx QJx, and partner opens 1C and RHO bids 1S, doesn't it feel like bidding 1N is much more sensible when playing a weak NT than when playing a strong NT? Partner's expected range, and typical hand should effect the ranges for your bids....

Yeah the 8 vs 7 only matters when Decalrer has Kx Kxx Qx Qxx where the x is smaller than 8. So if partner has Q98x or K98x he has a heart trick by force. Now unless partner also has a slow diamond trick AND the CQ or partner has the DQ, declarer has 11 top tricks (including the heart finesse) and can squeeze partner for a 12'th if you take the ace. I still think that taking the ace and partner getting squeezed because of it is more likely than ducking the ace and declarer has time for 11 tricks in the other suits/ or has a strip squeeze against partner, but it took me a long time to come to that conclusion...

Whereageles brings up a point that I consider crucial... Partner's maximum strength is considerably weaker playing MOSCITO than it would in many other bidding systems. (In theory, partner could have a bad 11 count if he was balanced) Personally, I didn't see any bids that I liked particularly and decided to psyche a 1NT overcall. Sure, I lied about shape and range, but for once I actually had a stopper :-) I considered doubling, but I didn't like any rebids over 2♣. In particular, I was worried about the auction P - (1S) - X - (P) 2♣ - (P) - 2N - (P) 3N Unfortunately, I ended up with the following auction P - (1S) - 1N - (P) 2♠ - (X) - P - (P) 3♣ - (X) all pass Free ended up transferring to clubs and LHO started doubling. The first problem here is the range you are playing for the 1NT overcall is wrong!! If partner is a passed hand and the most he can have is a balanced 10 count or an unbalanced 9 count (I can't remember the ranges in Moscito offhand), there is no point ever overcalling 1N on only 15. Further, if partner truely has a maximum, say a 9-10 count, he will certainly balance, so you will never miss a game passing with a 15-16 count. In fact partner, will balanced with 7-8 and shortage in spades, and maybe even with 6 and the right shape. If partner passes with scatter values and spade length, you will be very very happy defending. If you were doing something sensible, and playing 1N as more like a great 16-19, or 17-bad 20, or 17-20, or something like that, a 1N overcall would be in the range (or at least close to within the range). Pass might still be right, but its not because you had too much for 1N and not enough to x and then bid 2N opposite a passed hand.... I find that this is a recocurring problem among light opening bid players, a first or second seat pass limits there hand more than in standard, but they don't adjust their methods to take advantage of that additional information. For instance, Qxx Kxx Qxx AKQx Non-Vul vs Vul, Partner passes, RHO bids 3S, your bid? In standard you have a guess, and most players would bid 3N on the tenuous stopper hoping that it makes. (I think that bid is wrong, but its not wrong by that much, and if you want a drop more to bid 3N, add another J somewhere and then I will make the same argument) Playing a method where partner can not have a balanced 10 or 11 count (say 10-12 NTs), and might have even opened some unblanced 9 counts, I think 3N is rediculous. You need partner to have an absolute max, to even have reasonable play at making 3N, and if he had that hand, he might be able to x back in (say x Axxx Axxxx xxx). Personally if he xed back in I would pass rather than venture 3N where I have no tricks and RHO can probably duck the first spade to keep a link with partner...

Sure declarer's actual hand was: Qxx Q9x Qx AKQxx I ducked, Declater won, led the HQ partner not covering, and then took hise 5Hearts and 3 daimonds and squeezed me in the blacks for making 7. Not a tragity at IMPS, but at mps the over trick will matter some (probably turns a 30% board into a 10% board). Note partner had 1480 shape! At the other table, the contract was 4D-x, down 4 for 1100, which lost out to the slam.

While I agree with most of the comments made before, let me comment about the places were IMPs can be swung your way, fairly randomly: As has been mentioned before 1. be slightly more conservative than the opps on bidding game, when there are two pros defending at your table. There are many situations where there are 35-40% games and you gain 10 if you make and lose 6 if you go down. As you will go down more often than you will make, if there are 3 such deals in your match and the opps bid all 3, and you don't, here is the matrix: Lets say they are 40% games: All 3 make: 6.4% of The Time, Lose 30 2/3 Makes: 28.8%, Lose 14 1/3 Makes: 43.2%, Gain 2 0/3 makes: 21.6%, Gain 18 You will gain big 21.6% of the matches, and lose bid 35.2% of the matches. So if you thought your head to head chances were much worse than 40% this is a reasonable chance to take. Note this is the losing strategy in the long run by IMP expectation (-1.2 imps/bd), but only by a little bit. And if the games were really 35% games it becomes winning strategy. 2. Be VERY agressive for part scores. One way expert teams pick apart their opponents is by winning lots of 3 and 5 imp gains in part scores. Further even in the dangerous situations where many experts will not bid (such as marginal balancing situations over 2S), it is often the case that bidding will gain 2-3 imps 3 times, while losing 10 the 4'th (IF they remember to x you). Obviously this is a long term losing strategy, but you will often have matches where you made this decision 4-5 times and never ran into the lose 10 layout (which only happens 1/4 times on the very agressive part score competative bids). So on a good day, you can be plus 10-15 from this strategy, and the good day occurs maybe once for every 3 matches. 3. Be a little less disciplined with your (prior to the opps bidding) pre-empts. This introduces a great deal of randomness in your result. For instance, white vs white consider opening 3C on: x Kxx xxx QT8xxx in first seat, which is an action that favorites usually don't take, because its highly swingy. 4. Consider bidding a 50% grand slam early in the match, if its an obvious slam hand and the other teams client isn't at the other table 5. Play a different 1N opening bid range. 1-5: I probably wouldn't over do it and take too many of these actions, after gaining 15-20 imps from these types of swings, you probably want to get more mainstream, since the odds of you winning have now gotten much better (assuming your team is not totally hopeless) 6. Bid more agressively to game/slam whenever the client is on opening lead. 7. Do not sacrifice very much when the client will play the hand. If the client opens 1N, don't overcall as agressively as normal, until the declarership of suit contracts is determined. (E.G. IF the client opens 1N, With KQJTx xx AQxx Jx I would pass 1N but bid 2S later if responder x-fer into hearts. You want to let the client declare, rather than yourside declarering, whenever the decision is close. Similarly you want to client to defend rather than the pro declares, whenever the decision is close) 8. And if you haven't built a 20 imp lead when the client was in, its now time to prey.

The important thing is that since Roy Welland is playing, there will be good wine at the event! :)

"There is absolutely no good reason to make an immediate limit raise with this hand that I can see. If instead you simply bid 1♠, think about the following sequences and how you will like/dislike them: 1♥-1♠-1N? Ok, partner is limited, probably 2-5-3-3, but now I would make the limit raise of 3♥. A good partner will bid 3 spades if they happened to be 3-5-3-2 (and your partnership does not raise on 3 card support). " So then partner will pass 3H with xx Axxxx AKx Qxx (around a 50% Game) But bid game with Qx Axxxx AKx xxx (About a 34% game) or Kx AJxxx Kxx Qxx (Well under 25%) In otherwords, because you bid spades first, partner will ALWAYS make the wrong decision. "1♥-1♠-2♠ ? Fantastic. Even if your partnership is prone to raising on 3 card support in this sequence, you should be in game." Is this fantastic? Kxx AJxxx AQxx x is a really good 2S bid and this is about a 35% game. And so on.... When you hold, J98xx KQT xx KJT you would rather partner is SHORT in spades and long in CLubs, not short in clubs and long in spades. Only when partner's spade holding is super strong (2 honors or Axxx) does length in spades become an asset. If you view this hand as a constructive or limit raise, its wrong to bid spades unless you played 4 card majors when you were not sure you had a heart fit in the first place.... Yes yif partner has 4S you might be better off in spades, but you can't find that contract without messing up partner's hand evaluation. I think this is a limit raise (about 3 cover cards) if your opening bids are pretty sound, but you might only make a constructive raise if you played agressive opening bids and the 1-2 sequence is very sound (say 8-10 support). My preference is agressive opening bids, and a conservative response structure, so I can make a single raise with this and then show club values if partner tries for game.

"When three notrump is one of the alternatives, choose it." -Bridge World Now I'm confused... I always thought that Hamman's Rule had to do with the maning assigned to a 3NT - more specifically, that this should be treated as natural in almost all circumstances... No Hamman's rule was quoted correctly, of course it assumes that the meaning of the bid 3N was a suggestion to play in the contract 3N. In any case this is a clear 4D bid, give partner a perfect minimum for his bidding (say a 1444 16 count) and you can only make 4D (and maybe not even that), so there is no point bidding 5. On a bad day partner has: Qx AJxxx AJx AQx and you will be lucky to go down only 1 in 4D. Passing is way too swingy, opposite x Axxx AJxx AKxx you will be very lucky if you can cash 2 clubs and 2 diamonds. Perhaps if a. the opps are vul at mps b. they are crazy c. but they are good card players (so playing in a normal contract doesn't give you good mp odds just from the possibility that they will misdefend) then you might consider pass.

My opinion is that pulling is right; at the time I posted I wasn't sure whether pulling to 5♦ or 5♥ is better. After thinking about it some more I think 5♦ is clearly the better of these two options. I think 4N should not be rkc, but a scramble (2/3 places to play). You will correct 5C to 5D to imply 6-4. A direct 5D bid should be 5-5 or 6-5 (or maybe 5-6). But if 4N is rkc however impossible that is, you have to decide between 5D and 5H.....

Both Vul, You hold AJT98x T - J876xx In first seat you choose to pre-empt in spades (I chose to open 3S, others might choose 2S and judge later whether to bid clubs, some might elect to pass and guess later) LHO overcalls my 3S bid with 3NT and RHO raises to 6N. Partner lead the spade 7 and dummy has: Problem 1:Kxx AJ8xx AKx T9 Declarer plays low from dummy at trick 1. What card do you play at: 1a. IMPS 1b. MPs Problem 2: change the heart 8 in dummy to the heart 7

How about: x=3 hearts, considerable extras (16+ with a singleton somewhere, a drop more without one) or 4 hearts INV 2N 3 different hand types: 1. minors, competative, 2. 6+ Diamonds not much extra (correct 3C to 3D) 3. 4+D, 4+C a stopper (or at least a half stopper) and a game force (Can bid 3S next to show a 5'th card in partner's preference suit, 3H next to show Hx and doubt about NT, and 3N next otherwise) 3C Both Minors, Extras, NF 3D 6+D, Extras, NF 3H 4 Hearts, Min 3S GFing not sure where you belong, less than 3 hearts, usually no stopper. Can have 1 or both minors. The headache is differentiating between 6D, and both minors on game forcing hands, but that is always a problem. So if you have a 19 count with 4D and 6C you have to open 1D?? If the cuebid guaranteed a 5'th diamond, like in standard, that helps a lot....

Either 5D or 5H seems fine. I would bid 5D unless your partnership is a firm grounds on 5M raise auctions. (I play 5D as a slam invite showing a Diamond control and denying a spade control and 5H as a demand for partner to bid a slam with a spade control.)

Its between 5 and 6S. I am a 6 spade bidder on grounds: a. we might make slam b. they might make slam c. I can't easily find out if either a or b is true d. We are unlikely to go down more than 2.

1. 4C. You hav a good raise to game, and who knows, you might have slam if partner has shape. For instance, KQxxxx Kxx KQxx - produces 6S (and 7D but don't ask me how to get to 7D). Also if, suprise suprise, LHO raises clubs, you want your partner to know you have a good hand. Most likely you are just going to end in 4S but whenever you have a sound raise to game that doesn't mind partner bidding more with extra playing strength, you should cue-bid to set up the force. 2. 4S. The cue bid just says, I have a good hand and I think we have game somewhere. You don't have anything extea to bid, but since you have to bid something you are at least lucky your suit is good enough to play against Hx. 3. Pass. You don't have a fit. You might beat this (I would say you are a favorite to beat this, where are their tricks coming from?). Partner might have a decent diamond fit for you, but you are just guessing. When in doubt raise with a fit and pass with a misfit... p.s. You should NOT lead a club or a high diamond. Lead trumps as fast as you can....

Its clearly correct to win the spade and return a spade. First the diamond switch only works if partner has Axx, which leaves south with exactly 3325 shape. This is very against the odds (it could work if partner has Ax and declarer makes a mistake, but why play for a parley?). Second, partner's spade length is 5 or 6 and his diamond length is less than 2 cards on average, which gives better than 5-2 odds on partner's card (if he has one) being in spades (the fact that you already know he has the JT of spades is biased information, and i don't think it changes the apriori odds). But yes, 0 or 2 higher would help some here....