TylerE

2♣ seems obvious to me.

Nope. 2♠ might be the least of competing evils. 2nd choice 2♦. 1NT a very distant 3rd... I'd rather open 1NT (Not that I'm seriously suggesting that) and make them find the club lead than rebid 1N.

This is something I'd like to see too, at the very least in the blatantly obvious cases (e.g. holding all high trump)

Is this strictly youth, or are U27s allowed also?

I lead trumps against doubled part scores unless I have a compelling reason not to.

Side question: Suggestions on auction?

Way I play it is that 1m-(1M)-X 99.9% promises exactly 4 is the unbid major, with a bid of the suit showing 5. After 1♣-(1♦) the bid only promises 4.

Pass, and don't hate it. 500 might be conservative.

What ruling? You were told 2♠ was non-forcing with ♠, opener passed, and responder showed up with...spades.

How about something like this: Win lead in hand (I'm going to assume E puts in either the J or T) A♠ duck a spade in both hands I'll assume RHO wins and exits a diamond (Leaving W with Hxx at this point) I'll win the ♦, and lead a spade towards the Q. Assuming this holds (or LHO pops the K) I now have an established spade trick in dummy. Hrrm, eh, I dunno, I do much better on this kind of problem at the table, but I'm assuming the winnging line is some sort endplay with W to score a 3rd ♦ for the 9th trick.

How cheap do I get to win the first trick?

I prefer 4♥ to 4NT, and the weaker north could be for the cue, the more I like it. South doesn't really have much in the way of extras, and most importantly, doesn't really have a source of tricks. IMO N should bid 5♦ over 4♥ (RKC is also acceptable, but might lead to 7 (You do have all the Ks, after all). Also: I think there is real merit in opening 1NT on the south hand, which should work well, e.g. 1NT-2♦-2♥-3♦-3♥-RKC or some such.

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sj54hkqj7dk64c864]133|100|Scoring: MP 1♣ - (1♦) - 1♥ - (p) 2♣ - (2♦) - p - (p) 2♥ - (2♠) - ?[/hv]

Opening 1♠ and jumping in clubs then rebidding clubs doesn't show this fairly closely? I'll admit opening 1♠ tends to lose a ♣ fit on some auctions but so does 1♣ make it much harder to get to a spade fit (Especially a 5-2 when 4♠ is the only playable game).

Ya know, in my regular local partnership we play plain blackwood, and I'm often glad for it. Makes hands like this much simpler. Not as good for getting to grand but in some ways it makes it easier to get to 6.

As a simple soul at heart I'm strongly temped to just shootout 6♠.

29th - Feb 1st. Was going to get up with you actually. I should be up for The 31st and Feb 1. Could also possibly be cajoled into the Evening session on Friday (It's ~1:20 to the playing site from my workplace, so it's pretty doable).

What days are you gonna be there? I don't have any firm plans yet but I'll probably end up showing up in some form Saturday and/or Sunday.

With five cards in a major, why aren't you transferring?

Any chance the 30 seconds between posts can be lifted or imposed only when you submit the 2nd post? I will often glance at several threads before picking one or two to post on, only to be forced to twiddle my thumbs before the software will give me a second reply form.

More good slams are bid based on shape, fit, and shortness than HCP. Also, as a rule, Blackwood is a tool for staying *OUT* of bad slams, not getting to slam. This is a distinction that many don't grasp. Basically the idea being that you should be in grand with all four aces, and in six missing one, and in five only if missing *two*. If you are unwilling to commit to that, you are better of taking a more cooperative approach, using cuebids or the like. The voluntary raise to five is also an under-appreciated sequence.

3♠ for me. Bypassing 3N at MP == Madness. This definatly shows exactly a half stopper.

I was referring to the people suggesting pass of 1♠.

3♦ looks obvious. Shocked at the passers. This looks like a great hand to steal the pot. If I was your partner, opps might be cold for 3N, and instead let us drift off a couple in a partscore. (I generally open about rule of 19 with a 5 card or longer major playing precision, in all seats)

Agreed, this is really really bad. Can't beleive they're actually doing this, essentially encouraging the membership to violate the CoC (The section that basically says you should try to obtain the best possible result on each board, regardless of longer-term consequences.)