Apollo81

In D6 this has been allowed since 2003 at least (the first time I played in this district), perhaps for even longer. No coincidence, since Woolsey lives in SoCal and Robinson lives in D6.

Agree with gnasher, I think slam will make pretty often.

Kenberg, you live in district 6 (Maryland, DC, Virginia), right? At sectionals and regionals, there is a district policy that allows Woolsey/Robinson in general chart events. Many clubs also allow this convention even though it is not general chart, as so many people in the district play it. I suggest checking with the club director if you want to use it.

In local sectional, matchpoint scoring, opponents (who are a regular partnership) have the following auction: 1♥-1♠ 2♣*-2♠ 2NT*-3NT *alerted I'm on lead, I ask what the alerts are, and responder says that 2♣ was either natural, 1633, or showed certain types of good spade raises, then says that 2NT shows 1633 with game interest. I ask if it could also be a good 1534 hand, and responder says no, opener would have bid clubs with such a hand. Responder had KJxxxx Tx Ax xxx or some such, and opener was 1534. How would you react to this? None of the above affected the table result.

In a real game, I would only open 1NT if non-vul and playing MPs or BAM. Otherwise I'd open 1♦.

We should bid, we're unlikely to beat 2♠, and -110 isn't going to be worth much.

North should double 1♥. The extra high cards make up for the poor shape. It's not clear to me how many spades South should bid after this (I can see a case for 2, 3, or 4 regardless of whether or not East bids 2♣).

I like 4♣. Shows that we aren't too intent on notrump and that we don't have diamond support or a concentration of strength in one major. If partner's got a hand like Axx x AQxxxx Qxx, slam isn't bad, and partner could have a lot more than this here. I want partner's hand driving this one since he knows the diamond story better than I do.

Finally an appropriate post for action ratings. 2♠ 100 1NT 60 1♠ or 2NT 20 other 0

3♣ is more descriptive than 3♦.

I would make a penalty double so that if they bid 3♣, partner can hit it with the appropriate hand.

I voted 2♥ eh. I don't really think we have game, I'm just trying to shut them out of the auction. This could even go for a number on a bad day. Three small trumps and QJxx their suit just sucks.

I don't know why you would want to play a 4-3 fit being tapped in the long hand. I would just bid 5♦ over 3♥.

2NT, showing 22-23 balanced. You have a bit much to pass IMO.

Agree with Mike and Roger -- it's nice to have a system bid that shows a hand too weak to invite 6NT but strong enough to make 6m a good contract if opener has a fitting hand with a minor.

I should really remember to post the result when I post a problem. I held this hand and passed at the table, and I didn't think it was clear. LHO raised to 3♠ passed back to me, and I passed again. I don't remember how 3♠ did (down 1 I'm guessing), but we were cold for 3NT -- partner had a 9 count or so.

Agree with jdonn and jjbrr -- 6♠(4xx)

I agree with jjbrr and strongly disagree with a direct signoff. At the very least we should cuebid once. KQxx Kxx xxx Axx and Kxxxx xx xxx AJx are both good grands.

I've noticed that GIB often leads a low trump against auctions and from holdings like this one. No idea whether that works well or not, and it's not something I'd typically consider. I'd lead the singleton.

Less complicated than healthcare.

no yes

I hate deer. Sure they are cute and all, but they carry Lyme disease-ridden ticks, they jump out in front of vehicles, they poop in your yard, and they eat your gardens. I'm a dog person, never had one as a kid, but have had a corgi/jack russell mix for the past 4.5 years

Unobstructive auction after a strong club? I'm afraid I don't understand. I can't tell whether this is a sarcastic comment or not.

I never change the titles..... it is someone else... :( If 12438 posts is Papa, then who's the Hog?

It's generally incorrect to upgrade distributional two-suiters into 1♣. Since your other openings are limited, you don't need jump-shift auctions such as 1♠-1NT-3♣ to show game-forcing hands. These can instead be used to show these very distributional 14-15 hcp hands, e.g. AKxxxx x x AQJxx. The problem with opening 1♣ is that your two-suiter becomes very hard to show if the auction gets competitive, and even if you can show it, partner may play you for a better hand than you actually hold. I've had good results from upgrading 15-counts into 1♣ that have: - a very good 6-card or longer suit, e.g. AKJTxx and are one-suited in nature - a singleton or void somewhere I also think you will generally have good results from downgrading bad 16-counts into your presumed 13-15 1NT range at unfavorable vulnerability. 1NT is both more descriptive and preemptive than 1♣. Also when the opponents interfere over 1♣, I've noticed peoples' standards for what is a game force tend to get a little looser, so it's nice to have a little extra when this happens. Of course, all this presumes you aren't upgrading a lot of good 12-counts into your 1NT, since if you're doing that, you shouldn't also downgrade routinely. I don't like upgrading hands like this into a game-forcing response. Imagine opener with a singleton in your suit and a minimum; how well do you think this hand will play in game? I mind less if you had a seventh card in the suit and the suit is a major. In fact, if your 1♣ opener could be an ordinary balanced 16-count, I would make 9 hcp the normal minimum to force game and upgrade only very good 7 counts and good 8 counts. Also, the more distribution you have, the more the hand argues for an immediate shape-showing bid, so I would feel compelled to force game on say, - xxxxx xx AQJxxx. When you respond 0/3 keycards and you have 3, you are usually forced to bid a slam even if partner tries to sign off in 5. The exception is if you have already shown a very strong hand (e.g. you opened a standard 2NT or 2♣). So the main problem is that your partner just made a wrong bridge call that had nothing to do with Precision, although I agree that hand definitely deserves to be upgraded (I'd upgrade even with 6-2-4-1 and the same high cards). I have about 9 years experience playing Precision.