skjaeran

Agree with H32 For me the carding would be the same playing standard and UDCA, since I play present count playing standard and original count playing UDCA. But this would never be an issue in partners suit, since I'd never agree to lead lowest from all holdings.

My question is which card you play on the second trick, after you lead low (attitude I guess) on the first trick. You'll have at least the choice of 2+ cards to play on the second round and I'm wondering what that choice means. Agree on a different lead style in partners suit. Leading lowest from all three holdings is incomprehensible (to me at least).

Well, do we know anything about the level of those players in Bens survey compared to those voting in the poll here? I guess the level here is somewhat higher than in a random collection of players online.

Agree. But it isn't obvious that bidding 3NT now is the safest route to end up playing there. Then again, 2NT might see us playing there.

3♦ is OK. I don't like 3NT - I'm not at all comfortable if partner bids 4♥ over it, eventhough I don't show a balance hand. 4♦ would be leaping Michaels, but I don't like it if on this hand if natural.

I expect to make 7♠, and that's what I'd bid.

1. Yes, I'd overcall 1♠ with this hand. 2. The high card strength is there for a double, but I prefer 1♥ with this ratty suit - double followed by a heart bid later should show a real suit. 3. The 1NT rebid should show 18-19 or a hand with similar playing strength. 4. North has an obvious double of 1NT. 5. 2♥ shows a weaker hand. 6. (1♣) 1♠ (p) 2♦ (transfer) (p) 2♥ (p) 3♠ (p) 4♠

I lead a spade. I've got no problem with a club either, but think a spade gives better odds.

hum.. wasn't pard supposed to be a passed hand? :) Try reading the OP. The 2NT overcaller was in 3rd seat after p-1♠.

Invite. 3♣ or 3♥, depending upon what game tries apply. Or even 2NT if we've got a decent response structure.

Is it normal to misspell Boris' name? Correct is Boris Spasskij.

Very easy 2NT rebid. 3♣ is sick on A empty fourth IMO. If for some reason I couldn't rebid 2NT I'd bid 2♣ long before 3♣.

Preemtive for me for sure. I've got several other ways to go slamming. This is the only way to preempt at the 5-level.

Yeah, and they didn't lead ♠ or ♣... So play safe If all have a natural diamond lead it's wrong to play safe. Low trump to queen.

I transfer with 2♦. If partner super accept I bid game, else I invite. But with partner over opener it's close to just bidding game.

Partner took the slow route to 3NT, going via 4th suit. It's clear that he's got some interest here. You can't be sure he's slammish; he could be looking for some other rebid than 3♦ - either 3♣ or 3♠, just to find the best game. With two empty suits and a void in partners suit I think it's an overbid to raise to 4NT - which is the only bid I can envisage. I'm better than minimum, but I'll pass.

I'd open a strong club and not have the problem at all. :D Or I'd play Gazilli and have a way to show this hand. etc etc I think it's great that you have a method for these hands (and if you want to share your system notes more generally I'd be interested), but I think Han is interested in the judgment call in a more standard 2/1 system. Hehe, I know he is. Then again, I do have another option. Whatever other methods I play here, I play 2NT as GF. So with non-regular partners I'd rebid 2NT (I generally know who play this as GF around here). 2NT GF is a very common treatment at the top level in Norway.

Looks like my stupid 3NT instead of pass last round might get punished here. I don't think we can make anything at all, and aren't sure we can beat 4♣ either (we rate to beat it). Pass shouldn't be forcing IMO, so that's my call.

I'd rebid 2♦, transfer to ♥, intending to bid 3NT next.

I agree, but I thought your arguments were flawed. Especially the point that the hands where you really prefer the forcing 2S are more common than the hands where you really prefer the non-forcing 2S. The situation is not the same as over a 1S opener because now already 2 other hands have shown strength. Phil is right, I was arguing against gameforcing which was silly. But I think the same argument holds against forcing 2S. Make the hand a little weaker and you'd be less comfortable bidding 2S. And even with this hand you'd much prefer if partner was allowed to pass 2S, as it may very well be the last making contract. Something just occurred to me. Maybe it is possible to combine forcing and non-forcing advances here by playing transfers. What do you think? Don't you read the whole thread, Han? There's already a couple of voices for transfer advances. :D

There's not enough values left for "sound" to have any meaning in this sequence. There are still three valuable reasons to bid: Leaddirecting Preempting Finding a save 3♥ could be leaddirecting and looking for a save, while higher bids would be preemptive and looking for a save.

Agree with the bidding this far. Now I jump to 5♣, giving partner a fair description of my hand. He should be able to judge when to pass and when to raise to slam, unless my singleton heart is the key. However, I can't see any other reasonable bid that doesn't misstate my values.

Actually, we do over 1♣. Of course we use transfers, 2♦ showing either a weak or strong jump shift in ♥s and 2♥ the same with ♠s.

Never ever is a very long time.....indeed very long time Why never, ever? That's easy. I'm a social democrat, that's I'm voting on the left side (not far out on our political scale, but outside your scale) in norwegian politics. The republicans would place at the far right side in Norway, far from all my ground political beliefs. Sure, even the democratic candidates will place to the right side of the center over here. But I'd be able to find at least some common ground there. A democratic president would pull in what I consider the right direction on some issues and avoid pulling in the wrong direction on others.

It's gerber, obviously :) Sure, 4♣ has to be Gerber. I'll go 4♣ too.