dake50

" In my world a double says lead our suit." --jdeegan *** Since with no direction, partner often leads his suit, *** this double is better played to ask a Heart. *** In my world a double says lead a heart. *** This is sometimes agreed that the likely *** solid suit is the one below the suit bid. *** Here unbid Major is featured by a lead-direct double.

I'd add to those saying long spades that this delayed 4S shows AK defense - letting partner double. Don't preempt a preempt to bar those 1-suiters without defense is stick-in-your-own-eye thinking. Use forcing T/O bids for strong hands then show 1-suited. Craft me a 4S bid that couldn't be Force T/O then 4S. Had to be 4S strong immediately. Then you see that stick-in-the-eye.

I try C:KA, C4 out. If winning 2xC + uppercut doesn't work, rethink this defense gets really intriquet. I don't think establishing C:QJ will hurt. We intend 5 unescapable tricks.

Feels like a "one bid fits all" double failing. Accept this failing case unless you have a bid for 4xS + 5xC T/O. Of course other shape cases also.

With any system that limits 1M(not just precision, your exemplar), weak sign-offs have only an obstructive use. Game-us is off the table. Game-them is likely/sure. The weak obstruct loses as much in the telling "I'm weak" as it gains in space used up. IMO. Leave some ambiguity about how strong responders pass may be works just as well - let opponents guess.

This should be easier as partner has neg, semi-positive(5-7), or max-pass(by your opening minimums). Now the fit auctions show just like precision when unpassed. I suggest losing the 1D-neg with 2- or 3-passes before 1C opener; let 0-4 show next round.

To get the dis-agreers going, my 1980 partnership agreed a one winner or no winner hand lies/truths randomly. Whereas a maybe second winner signals by our agreement. Thus declarer wasn't always clued in. Does any one use a parity signal? This seems to have fallen away. My 1980 partner liked parity. Often the opening lead count plus parity lit up declarer's shape by trick three. Defense became easy for both partners.

My treatments are standard precision. Yours are not. This is pretty much what you'll get. Pick a version and play that. At least until you experience the weaknesses you and partner agree to amend.

"Because you may hold: KQJTxxxx Ax void KQx 5D may well not make, and 4S looks a reasonable contract. That is why and that is why I asked." -- the hog ** So you are saying "if hands exist that fail when partner chose to fix Diamonds and shut out Majors, you choose a response system to NOT COOPERATE with partner??" Still ABSURD! Systemically to not cooperate. Still INSULTING! Partner can't be trusted.

" The OP's question is whether or not 4S *IS* a Q-bid. Maybe it is to play. He is not particularly interested in how this particular hand would be bid. " Again answer the question in my original post. Did partner open 4D to ask for 4M natural??? ABSURD!!!!!! Then why on earth am I choosing 4M to play contrary to partner???? He don't know what he is doing?? INSULTING!!!

Look at nightmare. Try all transfer responses, D->H, H->S, S->C(or bal), 2C->D then Herbert negatives on the second round. And of course responses above 2D are picture bids.

Fake 4S Q-bid, then 6D. Partner deliberately chose to shut out 4M when he bid 4D.

Is this semantics? Penalty double *means* STRONG T/O Dbl? Convert if you will. But this is so-o rare. Weak takeouts elsewhere.

I rather like canape weak OR strong overcalls to these 2-way bids. Leave the only assured "we claim to own this hand" bid is double.

That's the reason I use asking bids here.

I would never criticize partners who failed to bid a reasonable game. After all the contest is not won by the team finding reasonable games. Oh wait IT IS.

I'd like <2H> 5D .. and let the chips fall as they may.

"Players aren't allowed to use the same set of defensive methods against "Standard" 1C openings." --hrothgar Surely you realize 1C that "could be short" qualifies to allow ALL these conventional counters. As is precision 1D. AND only a few are not allowed in general. My point being that if you are investing in competing against 1C force, WHY are you not investing in competing against 1C prepared? !? 1C force has 16+ 1C prepared has 12-22.

So many are claiming disrupt 1C (Polish) is effective, but try the same disrupt of StdAm or natural prepared 1C. Doesn't that same disrupt bid cause way more problems because there is wa-a-y more strength categories AND wa-a-y more shape categories to untangle? I suggest looking at eg. Overcall Structure, Canape Overcalls, Amsbury Jump Overcalls especially against 1C,1D prepared opening.

Never limit your hand so partner can decide. Never quit until you are Wa-a-ay overbid. Rules I too play by.

This is a good 1H opener playing 4xM as I have both Majors, 2xA and a void. And 1C force tops my hand at 15. Partner with only 6xD, we pay out on that misfit. Further partner has a transfer to 2D for quits. So this misfit stops at 2D when it's a partial.

Doesn't A, A, Diamond out put declarer to a "finesse spades with 10-fit now or set?" Secondly didn't the 5H bid refuse to defend? Then surely no X.

Is partner slamming with S:xxxxx H:xxx D:xx C:Kxx or C:KQx? I think he should be after X+ X+ Q-bid+ raise.

Std American. It is so funny to see such heated disagreement about a "standard".

I was supposed to NegX over 3C. Partner would already decide this one.