skjaeran

It's very close between 3♣ and 3NT - a tough problem. At IMPs I'd normally bid the game.

Agree.

I agree with 2♠ initially. To show the strong hand partner should double 3♥. Thus 3♠ shows a "good" bad - that means maybe 6-5 and good interiors. The hand he held didn't fit the description - it's inbetween, and should overcall 1♠. Before seeing partner's hand I expected opps to make 4♥. I'd bid 4♠ as a save. On a good day it might make too.

1. 3♠. 2. 3♥ at this VUL, else 4♥.

Do you really want to overcall 2♦ on xxx Kx AKxxx Qxx ? That surely isn't anything like what a 2♦ overcall looks like to me. In a bidding contest I'd rate it 2 out of 10. 1 for showing up :) and 1 for what might tip partner off to the best lead. Else this overcall hasn't much going for it - a terrible offense/defense ratio, not much overall strenght and a terrible suit.

1. I'd split the blame 95-5, 95% to north who should have bid 4♠ on every opportunity (absolutely clearcut - no options there), 5% to south who had a debatable raise to 4♠ on two occasions (I'd have raised to game over 3♥). 2. Nothing to add - crazy 4♠ by north and shocking double by south.

As others have said: you shold not have to bid 2♣ over 1♥ with this hand. As to the 1♥-2♣ sequence and continuarion, with my previous partner I played that a raise to 3♣ showed a minimum raise, 2NT showed a GF raise and 2♥ was a catch-all for hands with no other natural rebid.

As others' I disagree with the overcall. Having said that, I believe it turned out well. I'll lead the ♣A. Partner's I'm playing with will hold a singleton ♣ for this double.

Agree. I continue with my lowest club (suit preference), and let partner evaluate.

I'd raise to 4♠, but with no conviction that it'd be laydown. Slam is OUT - thinking of that is pretty ridiculous to me. Even at these colours partner might be AK 7th and out, though he rates to have an outside card.

I'd not consider passing with a weak hand with an 8-bagger in 1st seat. 2♥ is sick, it's between 3♥ and 4♥. I guess I'd land on 3♥ at the table. 4♥ is far from sick.

I don't think we can make a slam at all here. To make slam a good proposition, we'd need partner to hold a hand too strong for a mere 2♠ rebid. So I'd just raise to 4♠.

Agree with Noble. Partner might pass a double on quite a lot of hands where that would be disastrous (for us).

At IMP's I'm not too scared about being hammered. Opps are mostly careful when they might double us into a game. Having an "unlimited" opener sitting over me is a little troubling, though. It's close. Give me the ♣T, and I'd not think twice before bidding 3♣. Now I'm reluctantly (cowardly?) passing. I don't expect partner to come to life here - ever.

I don't think there's much chance 6♣ will make. Nor 5♦. But I'd not surprised at all if 5♦ is the cheaper alternative, nor if parnter corrected 6♣ to 6♦. So I'd pass.

Absolutely agree.

5♥. My guess is that both sides go one down at the 5-level. But I'll take insurance. It's not hard to construct possible layouts where both sides can make at the 5-level. I'm quite sure 5♥ is the winning bid in the long run.

To busy to log in yesterday night. The consensus seem to be to bid 3NT, which was what I did at the table. With a nagging feeling that this might not be right. But with a non-regular partner I didn't want to make a not so clear 3♠ bid, and I didn't think I really had enough for 4♦. The complete hand:[hv=n=skqht8dakq973ck87&w=sa96h72d842cqj643&e=st87542hqj93dt6c5&s=sj3hak654dj5cat92]399|300|[/hv] 3NT made +2, where 6♦ was "easy" to make. However, we won 11 IMP's, as opps went -1 in 6NT. Curiously, we even were +8 in the Butler scoring. One table made 6♦+1, another 3NT+2, one 5♦+1, one 5♥-1, two 6♦-1(!), two 6NT-1 and one 7NTx-2.

3♣ over 2♥ would show 5-5 in my methods. Thus we're able to quickly find a 5-3 fit (responder rebids 3♣) and a 4-4 fit (2NT by responder, 3♣ by opener). I didn't play with my regular partner, thus this wasn't discussed, but I think his inclination is the same. 2♦ was GF, as posted. He could thus have rebid 3♦ over 2♥ with a hand suited for that. An important point is which minor suit opener bids over 2NT if his holding is 3-4. With weak ♦'s and strong ♣'s, I'd probably rebid 3♣. And with equal strenght or better ♦'s I's rebid 3♦. Thus, I can still be 1534. My thinking is that I'd raise 3♦ to 4♦ with that hand, and therefor 3♠ should be a bid showing uncertainty with regards to final contract. Probably 2524 with weak ♠'s.

1♠. 1NT might work better sometimes, but I think 1♠ is the winner in the long run. Being a light opener, I'm not very afraid of missing a game. 1NT might be hammered. 1♠ is a good lead director, and often makes competing for a part score easier.

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sjxhak8xxdjxcat9x]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♥ - 2♦ 2♥ - 2NT 3♣ - 3♦ ?[/hv] 2♦=GF Are you worth a try, and if so, what's the best bid now?

I also play a unbalanced 1♦ opening. Then this is a no-brainer negative double. Playing standard methods, I'd still double. But now it really is a stretch.

I've seen some auctions by pairs reversing etc on minimum hands. After a series of cuebids they tend to run out of bids at the 5-level. Neither knows if partner is minimum or stronger. Thus they have no idea whether they can take 10, 12 or 13 trick s(11 is possible too, of course, but never happens in these autions :) ). Reverses after 2/1 should show extra strength, something like 15+, depending on suit lenght and quality.

1)How can you bid 4nt with Qx of clubs and JTx of D and partner shows minimum hcp? 5S can be down. 2) Why is partner showing a club void, how does she know it is useful? Do you just show all voids over rkc? 1) Opener has made a move towards game vs a 3-7 hand with 3 card support - with minimum values I can't see him doing this with less distribution than this. I can't imagine a hand with partner with more than one club and no control after this bidding. Partner can't be missing a ♦ control - that's just impossible. What hand do you expect him to have where that's possible? The bidding tells you that ♦JTx is HUGE cards - they're fitting in partner's side suit. 2) Opener has got to show the ♣ void. That might easily be what's needed for a grand. Surely the void can be of no value, but we're heading for slam - showing the void is mandatory.

I don't like the ♦ suit much for an overcall. But I think 1NT is more flawed, so I'd land on 2♦. 3♠ as a splinter seems automatic to me with the north hand, and as Mike said - nothing can keep south out of slam then.