Simplicity

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sj9xhjxdk7xxckqtx&s=skqxhatxxdatxcaxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1N-3N[/hv] A small spade is led, and if as I did you play the Jack from dummy the spots make it pretty clear that the suit breaks 5-2. Hidden continuation:

At MPs it just looks right to cash the ♠A, eliminate clubs and play a spade to the jack. That makes 12 tricks with Q third or Qxxx onside immediately which is around the 20% mark? Meanwhile we are in danger of going off only when LHO has ♠QT9x and a diamond honour. Nice book problem at imps.

I'd say LHO flying ♦A and playing heart is pretty spectacularly poor. Will say noone mentioned the genuine chances of ♥AJ or ♥KJ on the right or of ♠xx♥Jx on the left (well either side but LHO would have led her AK).

Yeah i agree with a T2 club finesse. Would play a heart to the queen now. If that holds I'm home (club to the jack). If it loses, there are quite a few posibilities when i next duck a heart. (hearts 3-3, ♣Kxx onside and some endplay options).

Lets play 4♠, pard doesn't have ♥Axx and 11 tricks dont look secure opposite some hand pard may go on with. Also seems odd 4H is retransfer when we bid the suit naturally but w/e

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=s82hqt3daqckqt954&s=sa73ha5dk743cj872]133|200|Scoring: IMP [/hv] You reach 3NT by the South hand, and West leads the ♠4. EW lead 4/2nd highest. Plan the play.

This is very true, overcalling 1♠ on 4 card suit headed by the 5 would be very different

So to be clear RHO has shown a balanced hand we potentially have every suit stopped, abundant entries and a long suit to set up; yet you think we need to take this contract off a trick 1?! Right Diamond looks really obvious to me.

Format is Butler IMPs, you are playing strong NT 4cM (a 001 system i believe). Here a few that might be interesting, but dont worry whatever you do you're sure to be stuffed this evening. 1. ♠AKQT8 ♥7652 ♦AJ ♣Q8. w/r 3rd seat P-(1♦*)-1♠-(P); 2♠-(P)-? *1♦ was precision style 2. ♠JTx ♥xxx ♦Kxxxx ♣KJ. LHO deals r/w P-1N-2♦*-? *2♦ was single suited overcall in an unspecified suit 3. ♠KJ974 ♥K4 ♦AJx ♣852. w/w RHO deals (1♣*)-1♠-(x)-2♥; (3NT)-AP. 1♣ was strong, x a negative (0-4 HCP) - your lead. 4. ♠Kxxx ♥AKTx ♦Jxx ♣xx. r/r you deal 1♥-(p)-1♠-(5♣) ; p-(p)-x-(p) ; ? 5. ♠xx ♥J9x ♦AJxxx ♣Jxx w/w RHO deals (1♥*)-P-(2♥)-x ; (4♥)-? *10-15 precision Edited after rogerclee's post

Essentially your vacant spaces argument looks sound. However I think it's interesting as East might not practically have freedom of choice over his discards: If East is 3415 with the ♥Q then he won't discard a spade - We know he has at most 5 clubs so he cant afford to show out on the 3rd spade. Else when we find out he is 3415 we'll surely finesse against him. Consequently restricted choice would apply and P(3415):(4315):(5215) is 6:2:1, or East having 4 hearts is 9:2. Theoretically this all means East should discard 2 clubs with all these shapes so that we have no idea whats going on, but in reality he probably won't. Of course if East did discard a spade from 3415 we'd surely just play for East to have made a mistake? Consequently i think i depends a bit on our read of East. All in all i think its probably right to play East for the ♥Q both times. Or is this all gobbledygook?

2NT looks kinda natural to me so i'd expect systems on. Defo xfers - i really want partner to declare whatever. As for bidding game i'm not very sure at all - so i'd probably xfer and bid game. I'd really like to go back to last round and make a call that says i'd like to play 3H opposite partners "values". I think 3H then should have been to play and pass then 3H should show more.

I seem to recall West did infact correct to spades? Not that i think it changes much...

3451 is indeed a great shape for a t/o double. However I think 2♠ here is a better description - we show partner a minimum hand with support. It's not like we miss our heart fit when game is on - partner can still bid them himself and we'll raise. Yes me may miss our 44 heart fit, but if that's the case then partner has 5 spades anyways (he'd have responded 1♥ with 44 in the majors) and we're probably in as a good spot. One fringe benefit of this is that if we were to bid 1♦ (p) 1♠ (2♣) X (p) 2♦ (p) 2♠ we've now shown partner a non minimum with 3 card support.

Good work. Sadly the suit combination A3 QJ5 Has become much trickier.

On board 1 partner had Ax AQTxx QJx KQx, so 4♥ scored poorly when most other tables had an easier ride over a 2♠ preempt (RHO was 6124). Was a bit suprised to see people just bidding slam. I mentioned the 4cM weak NT scenario because i might have felt compelled to double in those conditions. Wondered if anyone might double regardless and get to slam easily if partner bids 5m. Board 2 pard was sadly - KQ AKQJxxxx KQx so 6♦ was -1 after a heart ruff. Such is life.