skjaeran

This is obviously forcing, unless you have very non-standard agreements. 1♠ over the double would be forcing for me. This bidding suggest a hand that would double at least two of the unbid suits. Probably a not so great ♠ suit (5-card).

This is a tough problem for us light openers. I think it's very close between 3NT and 4♣. At MP I'll tend to bid 3NT. But at IMP's I'll make a try for slam, as it's possible to stop in 5♣. If partner rebids 4♥, I'll raise to 5♥.

I rebid 3♦ here. If partner accepts the (initial) game try, he'll cue on the way to 4♥. If partner rebids 3♥, I'll cue 3♠ next. A 4♦ rebid would show a void in my methods.

Clearly not a jumpshift to me. I'd bid 2D and if partner bids 2H I'd bid 3D. Agree with Han.

This is an automatic 1♠ to me. We can easily have a game or even slam on. I won't pass and see partner have to declare 1♥. Of course it can be wrong to respond, partner might rebid 2NT or 3♥. But that doesn't have to be terrible. Playing rather wide range 1-openings (I don't open 2♣ on any 20-count), I've got to respond with this hand.

4♥, then double. Double shows that I've got a very good 4♥ overcall with some defence. Partner bids on or converts as is appropriate with his holding.

I believe we're in for some bad breaks. Might possibly go down in 4♠. I pass.

Agree 100% with 1NT. Clear pass now.

I'm sure I'd lead that ♣J at the table. But I fancy the ♦9. :)

I wouldn't advice anyone to take that bet. :)

Agree. Playing 3rd/5th you lead your true count card vs suit. I've played attitude vs suit some 13-15 years ago, combined with journalist and MUD. That worked fine, but it's very seldom used where I play - if at all.

I've never heard any name for it, except Splinter. I play it in all four suits.

Easy 2♣ rebid for me. Not remotely close to any other bid. I would not open this 1NT. I'd normally take another call (2NT over 2♦, 3♠ over 2♠), but that's close.

This might be crazy. But I'll lead a ♦. It's possible that RHO could throw ♦ losers on ♥'s and ♣'s in 6♠. On most layouts where partner sets 6♠ on a ♣ ruff, they'll make 6NT, and LHO almost surely would take out to 6NT. But off ♦AK he wouldn't, since partner would be on lead.

Agree.

Winston, have you abandoned this thread? Or are all new posters after May 8 "simply so lame that adding further criticism would have been akin to debating an idiot savant on the meaning of life, ...". :P B)

I'll suppose this is old style Acol. :) (I must admit I've never played that, and never will.) In that style this is a "clear" 2♥ bid. If partner is minimum without a ♥ fit, he'll rebid 2♠, and I'll pass.

East is on lead vs 6♠ Josh. But he should probably find the ♣ lead, though some would miss that lead. Apart from that - opps did very well to save in 6♥'s. I think you should bid 6♠ instead of making a second forcing pass at MP, since you expect a bad score defending 5♥X. With your fit, ♦ suit and controls, 6♠ might actually be laydown.

Here I play that a direct cue (3♠/4♣) accept diamonds and deny heart support. 3♥ show heart support and deny diamond support, whereas a raise to 4♦ show support for both suits. My experience is that this is superior in slam exploring sequences. Showing support for both suits might help opponents defending vs 4♥. Without this agreement I'll show my heart support and bid 3♥.

Deleted - somehow double posted.

Non-brainer 2NT. The 2NT rebid show 18-19 balanced. That's what I've got. 2♠ is a jump reverse. GF with an unbalanced hand. This hand doesn't fit that description. I play 1♠ as forcing here (in principle, there are hands where partner will pass and be right). I might have a 4225/4xy6 hand not strong enough to GF or a 3-suiter. (Or a minimum hand with 4♠ of course.)

It doesn't change much. The 7 could then be from 743, Q7, T7 or 7 (as I play it). I'd still switch to a ♥.

Who stole all the pass cards in my bidding box?? Seriously, I'd never double this unless playing very constructive raises, and even then it's questionable (or worse). Can anyone come up with some other lead than the ♦K? (I hope not.) ;)

I really can't tell partners ♦ holding, it might be Q7, T7, Q74, Q73, 743, 7. He should play the ten from T7x, so that's out. Since it's IMP's I can "safely" switch to a heart anyway. If partner holds the ace, or if he's got ♣Qxx, we'll beat this. The only time this might cost more than an overtrick IMP is when partner holds a singleton ♦7 and declarer has KQxxx K QTxxx Qx. Now he can discard three ♦'s on dummy's ♣'s and make it, while continuing ♦'s would beat it.

If you add "until his partner makes a call..", you've got it right. Here the undo came after his partner passed. Thus a change of call is illegal.