skjaeran

2♥'s with my regular partner, transfer showing a good 2♠ rebid (or better). In standard methods I'd rebid 3♠ - nothing else make sense to me.

How will you continue over this 2♣ ??? This seems very strange and unplayable atleast when vul. You employ the Multi principle. That is, you make a preference as high as you can in the alternative that's worst for you. That is, if the red suit's are "bad" from your perspective and the blacks are better or even great, you give preference to your best (longest) red suit. Partner will pass or bid ♠'s at the same level, unless he's got extra strenght and/or shape. If you make a 2♠ reply, partner will know that you can play at the 3-level (or higher) if he's got the red suits. If your hand is great, you bid 2NT, to ask partner which suits he's got. This shows game interest, so partner will bid cheaply with a minimum and make a stronger move if he's got a good hand.

So partner had something like what I'd expect. I'd love to be in 5♦ on these hands.

Ditto

I've got two defensive tricks, and nothing remotely close to a 3rd trick. I expect 4♦'s to show an offensive distributional hand without much defensive values. Can't see that we'll beat 4♠. At worst we go for -500 in 5♦'s - partner's short suit is in spades.

5♥. With 3-card support and a side king I'd never think of passing.

1♠ is adequate. I've got 5.5 losers. Cue-bidding 2♣ is too much, and a jump to 2♠ shows a longer suit and more playing strenght. I'm not afraid of missing a game if partner is passing this. I'm showing something like 19+ hcp and a 5-bagger or 16/17+ and a 6-bagger by doubling followed by a non-jump rebid.

In the original post it says: "slam invitational, at least 5-4 in spades and diamonds" for the 3♣ rebid. Don't know if this is a typo or if transfer advances was implied. Anyway, to me a minor at 3-level is natural and tends to be slamish. A cuebid by opener now shows 4+ support in the minor suit and a doubleton in the major. 3 in the major is preference, denying support for the minor. A raise to 4m shows support to both suits (3-4/3-5). With a non-fitting hand, opener signs off in 3NT.

If I play a low spade to partners king and get a spade back, declarer will manage to throw his remaining spade(s), if any, on dummys clubs before I can get on lead again. So that wont work. We'll score a ♠, a trump and a ♦. So I need partner to hold the ♣A. To make sure he know's what's up, I'll cash the ♠A and lead the ♣5 to his ace. A ♦ through lets me score the ♥10 for one down. This whole thing seems silly, but that's the only conceivable way to beat it.

It would be very hard to reach 4♠. Need some good/lucky decisions to get there. I'd treat the hand as a 22-24 NT, so we might also have a problem stopping at game level. As to the lead: ♣3 any time.

That's not entirely true. Opener could be more than minimum. With a very strong hand he'd raise to game, that's true. But partner can't know I'm full strength for my first double. I'd still take no further action.

1. I'd like to open 4.5 ♣ :P Since that's no option, I guess I'd put the 5♣ sign on the table. If that goes for -800, so be it. Opps either can make a game - then I lose 4-5 IMP's or a slam - I win 12. I guess I'd lose a little in the long run, but I can live with that. 2. If I chose to open 1♣, I'd rebid 2♣. I'd not want to make a jump rebid, since that should promise more high card and defensive strenght. 5♣ is out of the question - I chose not to preempt from the start, and opps is silent. No need to kill partner, who obviously holds a strong hand. 3. No special agreements. Use judgement. Either go slowly with a 1-level opening or preempt as high as you can, taking vulnerability and trick potential into account. We don't use Namyats. But use gambling 3NT. Can't rebid 4♣, for same reason you give.

For me the double denies a 4c ♠. I'd expect us to make 5 of a minor - partner will normally have 3 cover cards here. So my bid is 4NT - pick a minor.

Normally, when opps have bid two suits, a cuebid shows a stopper and asks partner to bid 3NT with the other suit stopped. Some play it the other way around - a cuebid asks for a stopper and promises a stopper in the other suit. Partner then either bids 3NT with the required stopper or returns to 4♣'s, which might be passed. If the 3♥ bidder goes on past 4♣, 3♥ was an advance cuebid, exploring slam. Here opener neither bid 3NT - thus denying the required stopper - nor bid 4♣, non-forcing. Instead he made a 3♠ cuebid. That should be gameforcing. Thus 4♣ is forcing - he set up the force himself. Partner probably temporizes, maybe he wants to hear a 4♦ cuebid.

That might be true in Acol or SAYC. But not generally. That sequence has been forcing in my methods since long before playing 2/1.

David is right in most non-ACBL territory. This is exactly how I would act, sitting south. Of course, sitting west I would fire a spade back after winning the ace. When you have UI you should strive to chose a logical alternative NOT demonstrably suggested by the UI. If there's no LA to the action you want to take, there's no restrictions on you. This case is cear cut - no competent TD would allow the diamond shift, and no ethical player would shift to a diamond after partners tank.

But don't cry when the TD gives declarer the choice to forbid or to order ♣ leads from your partner for the rest of the game. Not for the rest of the game, just the first time (s)he's on lead.

Nothing really. Aa-Grøtheim were partners for ages, then they both took a break and now they are back with new partners. Tundal is an old partner of Grøtheim's actually, European Champions even. Terje Aa plays with Jon-Egil Furunes. The joke in Norway is that the Norwegian open team can't afford to have Aa-Grøtheim as a pair. Too many penalties because of time violation. :P Roland Either of the pairs using Viking Club? I always enjoyed watching it in "action". There was always lots of time to look up the meaning of the auctions... Tundal played with Grøtheim on the norwegian team in the European Teams Championships in 1987, winning a broze medal losing a tie with Great Brittain. They played Viking Club then, and does after taking up the partnership again last autumn. Terje Aa played with Jon-Egil Furunes in our Premier League this season on a team with Grøtheim-Tundal, and won the gold medal. Furunes-Aa played in the Yeh Cup in China on a team together with Jørgen Molberg-Børre Lund Aa plays with Jørgen Molberg in the NABC's these days. Regarding the time penalties - that's really a joke. I don't think they ever got penalized.

In our methods the bidding would start 1♣ - 1♥ - 1♠. 1♥=transfer, 1♠=any hand with 3c supp and some with 4c support. I would then bid 2♣, a puppet to 2♦ (to play 2♦ or make an invite). (This is called the xyz convention.) Partner wld rebid 2NT to show 18-19 with 3♠'s. Over 2NT I'd bid 3♦, a new transfer, showing a ♥ suit. Partner would respobd 3♥, showing 3-4 in the majors, and I'd rebid 3♠, showing 6-4. Partner would really like this development, and respond 4♣, flag for ♥'s. Since the magic hand AKQ-AKxx-Kxx-xxx would make slam laydown, and the same hand without the ♠Q slam reasonable, I might press on with 4♦. Lacking a ♠ control, partner would now sign off in 4♥, which I'd pass.

who? That's what I do, and generally, most people do over here. I believed that was quite normal elsewhere too, since that's undoubtly the best approach in general. Maybe I'm mistaken as to what's standard outside of Scandinavia. If the lead is 2nd/4th, it's a very different story, since the 8 would be either singleton or from h8x.

Dummy (RHO) opened 1♦, showing 4+♥'s and 10-14. Declarer (LHO) made a take out double of your 2♣ overcall. That should normally deny 4c♥ support, so the field will not be playing in a ♥ game. The normal contract seem to be 3NT.

With the ♣9 in dummy, partner's holding is 8x or 8, since we lead 1st/3rd/5th in partner's suit. He'd have lead the jack from JT8x/JT8, the only "possible" holdings wiht more than two ♣'s. At IMP's this is an easy duck, to allow us to beat the contract when that's possible. At MP there's the possibility that ducking will allow them to make more than 10 tricks. ThenLHO needs to hold Ax-AKx-xxxx-JTxx or Ax-AK-xxxxx-JTxx. That's not unlikely at all. So I'll take my 3 tricks.

In my regular partnership we would start the bidding 1♣-1♦-1♥. Our 1♣ opening is either natural or balanced 11-14/18-19. Partner would transfer to ♥'s, and I'd rebid 1♥, showing all hands with 3 card support and some with 4. My next rebid would depend on parnters rebid. 2♥, showing 6-9 with 5card suit or 4c unbalanced, I'd raise to 4♥. Over 2♣ (puppet to 2♦), I'd rebid 2NT showing 18-19 with 3-card support. Etc. In standard methods, I'd just rebid 2NT, to show 18-19 balanced. I'd always upgrade this hand to 18.

1♥-1♠ 2♥ Openers rebid here shows a 6-card suit. A 2♠ bid by responder is not just to improve the contract - it's a forwardgoing move, showing some game interest. IMO, a new suit by opener after 2♠ is value showing, probing for a 4♠ game, not a probe for a new strain.

This is somewhat plausible, however the jump to 4♠ looks a little rich, even though opener shows a max 2♠ call. Note my prior comment about reversing the red suits. If there was a way responder could make a game try to showed the hands meshed better, I'd put more faith in this idea. Question: how do you show clubs? Is 1N semi forcing for you too? The jump to 4♠ is not rich IMO. The 2♥ is sub-minimum here. With a reasonable 10-count we'd "never" stop short of game. The alternative to raising directly to game would be to respond 2NT, showing a maximum 1NT response (10 to a bad 12), but that would normally show short ♠'2. Currectly new suits by responder is natural. But you might play them as game tries, showing values and doubleton ♠. 1NT in non-forcing in our methods. I know that's unusual playing 2/1, but it's quite normal over here (Norway), although 2/1 is far from what the majority play here. Showing ♣'s is a little problematic, unless we're 5-5 or have GF values. (We open 1♣ with 5-5 and minimum (11-13/14 bad).) What we do is open some 5-2-2-4 hands 1NT (if in the 14+-17 range) and pass 1NT with weak 5-x-x-4 hands. You might add semi-strong ♠-♣ hands in the 2♥ transfer, but we prefer to keep it pure. We've had several successes playing this method. Some 6-4 hands with ♠+♦ are problematic playing standard methods, especially at MP. If you've got a little more than minimum, but aren't strong enough to jump to 3♠ over a 1NT response, most are forced to rebid 2♠, since that contract often would be higher scoring than the ♦ partscore. We can transfer to 2♦ and rebid 2♠ if partner accepts the transfer. Recently we bid 1♠-1NT-2♣-3♦-3♠-4♠ in a big tournament. More than half the field played 2♠.