brianshark

3NT has a certain appeal to it alright. Nobody, including p will have a clue what's going on. It's just as pre-emptive as 4♣ in the sense that if opener bids his suit anyway, he has been forced to guess at a high level and they may be in the wrong game or miss slam.

Your "expert" partner is a muppet.

Finesse has everything going for it really. It's the normal play without the lead and an unusual lead is only more likely to make declarer do something unusual like play for the drop (as evidenced by the existence of this thread). The only other thing of relevence is if West has most of the outstanding values or no attractive lead he may be more likely to want to lead trump regardless. I guess a discovery play might be to play the ♥A and then Q at tricks 2 and 3 (intending to ruff the Q) to see if it's covered. But I can't see it affecting my decision.

In situations like this, can you leave the table and chat to a director to ask one bid or the other would be what will be ruled as being suggested by the hesitation?

It's been a pleasure Csaba. And thanks for introducing me to more weird and obscure systems like Symmetric Relay and Magic Diamond! B)

I'm quite surprised about the relative success of 4♥s here. It's quite against my initial guess (and others' as well). But the simulations don't lie! :)

What's wrong with the immediate jump to 4♠ after 3♥? Is there any response to the negative dbl that partner can make that won't lead to us bidding 4♠ on the above hand? It seems we want to play in 4♠ no matter what partner has, whether he has support or not, whether he's min or not. Aren't these hands generally shown by jumping un-economically and unilaterally to game? Having said that, I'm still not sure what 4♠ followed by a double would mean. Perhaps some slam try with long spades?

I have 5 spades and I have a GF hand. I will bid 3♠. Strength schmedt. We'd open this suit 1♠ easily enough. What's the difference? I think the doublers are over-thinking the hand and 3NT is an unnecessary punt.

If you double, partner will go out of his way to bid spades. Even sometimes holding a longer minor or most hands with a moderate heart stop and 4 spades. So I won't double. Unless RHO tanked, I think I'll bid 3NT, in tempo and with as much confidence as seems appropriate. Pard is favourite to have a heart stop and a trick or two. If I hear a double, I'll run to 4♦.

1. ♥T, safe leads against tight games. 2. 4♦ if partner is a conservative bidder because over the inevitable 4♥/5♦ raise, it helps the descisions to bid on or double. 4♠ if partner likes bidding slams because he may get excited and get us too high and our hand isn't that good.

When they have a fit, we have a fit.

I don't think I could find myself bidding 4♥. The suit quality is just not great and it's fairly easy to get forced. In my opinion, I think it's the weakest option.

I think I would bid 5♣ at the table. I reckon it rates to be the best spot, though I've no simulations or anything to back that up.

In my opinion, one of the two situations are true: Partner was scrambling for stoppers for a 3NT contract. His 3NT bid suggests he found them. Therefore pass. Partner had a slam try in diamonds. But your 3♠ bid was not what he wanted to hear so instead he decided to sign off in 3NT. My guess is that he has a shortage in spades and soft values in hearts or clubs (KJs and the like). If your spade values were instead in clubs or hearts then he would have pressed on to slam. 3NT should (almost) always be a suggestion to play. Mark me down for a pass.

I wouldn't take-out double or show the ♣ suit. I'd just ask for a stopper in whatever methods you use.

Well the jump to 4♠ seems right. But directly, I'd say we have something like KJ to 7/8 and nothing else. After a 1♠ first, more like KQT to 7/8 and an outside honour. After a 1♠ and then 4th suit forcing, I'd say it's a solid suit with a few controls outside as well. I think this hand fits better into category two. So put me down for: 1♥-1♠ 2♣-4♠ Edit: The more I think about it though, maybe this isn't doing the hand justice and maybe after 4th suit forcing is better after all. I'm undecided.

If you do not signal with your loudest cards, partner will assume you don't have them, therefore he will play you for doubleton/tripleton rather than quadrupleton and his obvious safe exit is to play another round of the suit. While I'm not certain the OS agreements here, I suggest that if you signal on the first round with the 8 (encouraging in diamonds / discouraging in clubs) and then play a suit preference 2 (asking for clubs), partner will take you for either having both diamond and club strength, or neither. And I expect him to figure out which. This obviously lets him defend as he sees fit. Hopefully a safe trump exit.

You're robbing your partner of the whole 1-level too and badly misdescribing your hand if you bid right away. You're surely going to get a second crack at the whip. Maybe partner will find a balancing double. Maybe opps have all the strength but can't find a fit and the deal is a complete misfit. It seems that passing first and bidding later is much more intelligent. You don't NEED to say anything right away with this hand. I can see much more good things happening by passing and waiting.

Raise for me too.

I'm happy passing in both those situations.

You have soft honour values in every single side suit. How can you possible think of making a weak jump? How is partner ever going to judge to bid on or double them or pass and hope to knock the contract, or defend correctly or anything once you make such a crazy, misdescriptive undisciplined bid? Unless you have agreed that jumps in this situation are wide-ranging and partner just has to keep quiet no matter what he holds, then anything other than 1♦ is ridiculous.

Arguably Switzerland and in particular Austria are much weaker than other hosts have been in the past, including the likes South Korea and Japan. In fact I'd say they are the weakest 2 teams of all 16 in the tournament. But overall, there is no massive difference in class between most of the teams so the seeding system doesn't mean that much. All the teams in this tourney have a chance to advance and no group can be that much tougher than any other (compared to Rugby World Cup).

I don't believe 75% can be bettered with 4 people. Though there are numerous ways to get that 75% probability. If I'm wrong, do tell so I can look harder.

I think I'll pass and see what partner has to say.

In the polish system I play with many of my partner's, we have fit-jumps only over doubles of 1x openings. I know of few opponents who play fit jumps here in ireland in the clubs I frequent, but I'd say there are one or two.