skjaeran

At the table I'd know the divisjon of the diamonds by the play in the suit, so that should be included here. That might help deciding how to play the ♣'s.

Why on earth should he ever do that? If I knew that RHO had a singleton or a doublton and he played the ten, I would know for certain to finesse (I'm talking about a situation where I've got the 9 of course). I know most inexperienced players always drop the jack in these situations. The correct tactic is to randomize (our ability in that regard is unfortunately very restricted) your play in these situations, to make it more of a guess for declarer. Unless he suspects that you'll always "drop the jack", (or have other indications from the hand) he'll go by the normal odds and apply restricted choice.

Well it's not exactly a wtp, 2♦ may well be the best solution given the alternatives but this is clearly more than a maximum. That might be true. But to me this is still an automatic 2♦. There's no alternative bid IMO, so I'd bid 2♦ without a second thought.

Agree with Phil here. I'd like a poll alternative for Stayman unless the 4c suit is terrible. :P

I play leaping Michaels here (4m=GF with m+♥ 55+) and cuebid as basically stopper asking (in reality it shows a long solid suit and something in the unbid suit, could be bidding on after partner's response)). Agree with other posters to overcall 4NT for the minors on this hand.

North's hand isn't great in support of a 5-6 south hand. Admittedly three of his four cards in partner's suits are good, but there's only four of them. ♥AK can on worst be absolutely worthless. South on the other hand has kept the bidding low from the start, rebidding 1♠, thus denying reverse strenght (correctly so). The good interiors in the spade suit and strong diamons suit really should induce a jump to 3♠ over 1NT. You don't need much from partner to make game and should tell partner so.

Stayman followed by 3♣ (over 2♦/♥) can't be slamivitational by a passed hand though. Personally I play it as GF with a 4c major side suit (non-passed). Transfer to a minor and bidding a major I use as slamtry with shortness in the major, except as a passed hand where I play it as natural (upon my partner's insistence). So with my regular partner I'd transfer to ♣'s and rebid 3♠ here. :P

He said: So if 3NT conventionally say that he's got no major suit stoppers, obviously partner won't pass without both suits stopped.

Normally I'd never look further than 2♣ as my first call.

2♦, wtp? Sometimes you've got a maximum.

The same happened to me just now. BBOTV started loading, then I just got the blue screen.

3♦ is natural and normally slammish in my methods. 3♥ shows preference, it denies 4c♦ in my methods. 3♠ would be a cuebid now, 3NT serious (no ♠ control) and 4m non-serious, lowest cuebid. Over 3♠ openers 3NT would also be serious and 4m non-serious.

Preemptive, normally quite pure. With a strong hand I make a forcing bid first.

Can't disagree with any of this. :rolleyes:

3♣ transfer first. If I get the opportunity I'll rebid 4♣ and then 5♦.

Your partner was dealer... Agree with Hannie on this one: 4♥ for now, 5♣ next if I get another chance.

Agree.

In Norway this is called Multi-Landy.

Bermuda Bowl Quarterfinal: USA1, Ireland, China, Egypt Semifinal: USA2, Italy Runner-up: Netherlands Winners: Norway Venice Cup Quarterfinal: Denmark, Canada, England, USA2 Semifinal: Netherlands, USA1 Runner-up: Germany Winners: France Seniors Bowl Quarterfinal: Canada, Denmark, France, Sweden Semifinal: USA2, Italy Runner-up: Brazil Winners: USA1

4N blackwood, 5 red, 5 clubs, 6C, 6 red, all will work. The opponents cannot profitably double you without allowing you to run to 5S (or 6). I'm not sure if 4N blackwood is allowable or not. Some folks seem to believe that it is a psychic of a conventional bid. Others think its just a tactical bid to confuse the opponents. Any opinions? And you're not allowed to psyche a conventional bid? Where on earth are you playing? Oops, don't tell me - it might be the ACBL? :D

I'd routinely open this hand 1NT, but not overcall. Two reasons: I'll wrongside the contract too often and I'd receive a (♠) lead benefitting opps too.

Not entirely what I thought, but less than four hearts he had. That was obvious, and I agree with the committee's ruling. How difficult could it be for the experienced, competent tournament player to bid 3♣ over 2♣? A tank for ages, then 2♥ means that he has prevented us from reaching the best spot. I am happy to see that the committee said just that (directly or indirectly) and adjusted the score. Roland As a TD and often AC member I totally agree with Roland here.

With 3-card support and a useful doubleton this is a clear 5♥ to me.

Another solution on the problem would be to call the TD before after the pass, see the auction rewinded and make a t/o double over 3♦. If you think your hand is too weak for that (I think it is), then face this situation. As it is, I'd raise to 4♥, but that's maybe stretching a little.

Being a light opener, expecting partner to open most balance 11-counts, I'd pass this.