Apollo81

#1 - That is exactly the hand partner had. I bid 5♦, unfortunately. #2 - I also bid 4NT. This resulted in -500 when +300 was possible defending 4♠x.

This is what I bid, but the other 3 players at the table (1 WC 2 expert) all said after the hand that they would have doubled, and that this action shows a penalty pass of 1♦x.

both #1 and #2 are unfavorable IMPs #1 --- (2♠)-Dbl-(4♠)-??? Q J9x AKQJx QTxx #2 --- (1♠)-2♥-(4♠)-??? xx -- AQJ9xx QJT9x

All vul, IMPs ♠xx ♥Jx ♦AKJxxx ♣Qxx (1♦)-p-(p)-Dbl (1♥)-?

1. No blame 2. North for raising (I'd pass) but clearly raising is reasonable, and it's not a bad game anyway. 3. South for not bidding 4♥ over 4♣.

So you'd vary your play based on declarer's perceived skill level? I assume this means you'd pitch a spade if you think declarer is competent, and something else otherwise? What's the something else?

It's MPs, so even if declarer is always making or always going down there are some points riding on the number of over/under tricks.

Yes there are some MPs riding on this pitch

I find it amusing that out of the last four responses, only one actually suggested a play.

Suppose you lead a heart. You see this dummy: ♠K4 ♥KQ872 ♦Q65 ♣A86 Declarer ducks, and partner wins the ♥J and returns the ♠10. You encourage, and declarer wins the ♠K. Declarer now plays another heart, partner winning the ♥A, declarer following low again, and you pitch?

Favorable, MPs ♠AJ9532 ♥5 ♦JT4 ♣Q97 p-(1♦)-1♠-(2♥) p-(2NT)-p-(3NT)-all pass There was a significant hesitation before the 2NT bid. Part 1: your lead

At the time I replied, the discussion about what to do at vulnerabilities other than unfavorable hadn't been started. I'd bid 3♣ if NV.

I'm all for aggressive leads against these auctions, but these are really poor holdings to lead from. Heart for me. At IMPs I'd lead a diamond I think.

agree

I'd do it even without the ♠Q. The ♣10 is quite an important card here.

Assuming they correct to 4♥ I'm doubling it.

FWIW I think I would have said roughly the same thing had we held the same shape with 0 HCP. The chance that we preempt the opps rises with such a hand, and the chance we have a game goes down.

I would have bid 4 of a minor over 1NT. Which one depends on whether we're playing fit jumps or splinters in this situation. I don't think the 2♦ bid did our hand justice, which is why we have a problem now.

There are many good things that can happen if you respond. The most likely is that you preempt your opponents out of their partscore or game, but getting to a making spade game or even 3NT is not totally out of the question. The only rebid partner could make that would make me really unhappy is 2NT, and even this can be overcome if we have a way to get out in 3♦.

agree, although the thought of opening 3♣ did cross my mind

Double and lead a diamond. I could easily be convinced that double is too aggressive here.

I'd open if I were NV. Partner won't drive to game quite as aggressively then, and if we happen to go down multiple tricks in something it hurts less.

Agree with pass on both. What do people think the standard meaning of 3♦ is on the 1st board at the point where the hand bid 2♦? If it is preemptive in nature rather than strong then I'd have bid that since w/r

1♥

I agree with Phil. At any other colors I would just open 5 for the preemptive value, and expect to occasionally be raised to a making slam. By opening 5♣ here at W/R we will miss virtually all good small slams, and maybe even some grands.