skjaeran

3♠ is fine with me. So is 2♠.

Looks like a 5♦ opening to me. 6♦ will lead to playing 6♦x 90+% of the time. I don't rate the outcome to be good enough in the long run. Prefer 5♦ which I'd expect to buy 50-60% of the time - which is more reasonable IMO.

I'd expect my partner to have six clubs most of the time here. He could be 3236/3136/2236 with a strong hand. I'm bidding 3♣.

Pass. Even playing Ekrens 2♦ (which I quit playing ten years ago) I'd pass this hand.

I'm leading (1st)2nd/4th currently vs NT. I used attitude leads some ten years ago (vs suit contracts too in fact!) with success. And I've used 3rd/5th. All styles have their ups and downs. There's one spesific scenario where 3rd/5th is superior to other leads - when your partner lead a low card, dummy and you have no honor card and you can see that declarer has a doubleton. Then you play your lowest card and lets partner in on this secret. If he lead from AJxxx (for example) he knows that laying down the ace if he regains the lead will drop declarers last honour. Other leads doesn't give you the information needed to pull this trick (of course you can guess).

Agree, but 3♠ only if very pushy.

I'm now in the transfer-shortness camp. But I've also played like Frances suggest; transfer-natural. Both versions have their upside and downside. Btw, I think Helgemo-Helness would bid 1NT-3♠ here.

4♠ all day. The fact that partner might be understrenght just improves the odds for this being a winning bid.

I'd become a martyr :) I've got kids, so that's not an option. :)

Paaaass

3NT.

3♥.

Me too.

1. 2♠ denied 3c♥, so shoud be 4225 with Hx in ♥ and extra strength - a quantitative bid inviting slam. 2. Honour cuebid confirming ♣'s - slam try.

I played like this with a previous partner. Made it much easier to find the correct defence on several hands when splitting high/low in 2nd hand.

Both sequences are AFAIK defined as forcing in all natural standard systems, though many Norwegians will play the first as a distributional invite (like Justin suggests).

I think Justin made it very hard for David here. A 3♣ rebid over 2♠ followed by 3♠ over the GF 3♥ would be better, but it's still not obvious for David to bid the slam - he'll know about Justin's distribution and the ♠K, but can't be sure about both ♦ honours.

Agree. As to the OP I think 5♣ should be natural and a suggestion to play. You expect to make opposite a normal 4♠ overcall; thus there are quite a few hands where partner will bid on. You won't bid 5♣ with a weak hand and a long suit with no support for partner where you only hope to go less down - with that hand you pass 4♠. Since RHO didn't double it's quite possible partner will do better than you expect.

This depends on what game tries structure you adopt. I prefer a jump in a new suit to show a big 2-suiter looking for slam. Many play it as a splinter; some that it shows a void, some allow a singleton.

Should be an automatic double. If someone put a gun to my head and told me not to double I'd bid 3NT. :)

I'd RKC too. Me too - I have to disagree with Mike on occasion.... :P

I'm a diamond leader here - I mostly agree with Mikeh's analysis.

Interesting everyday hand. I redouble, but this is very close.

Playing standard I'd have to overbid 2♠ here. With one of my regulars we play transfers here and have an easy 2♥. :)

I'd bid 5♣. 4♥ is overdoing it IMO. Partner would expect some more high card values or a void. (Sure there might be slam on.)