Apollo81

I voted for the last option =) Give me the ♥9 rather than the ♥7 NV opposite a passed partner and you might get me to do it.

Dont sweat missing this one, most people would.

The problem hand for the "extra shape or extra values" style will be something like AKxxx xx Kxxx xx, changing any x to a jack. Of course if you dont play 2M rebid shows 6 then youre going to lose some accuracy when you actually hold a 6-card major. You'll have to make a nebulous 2M rebid. At this point partner cannot support your major since a raise could be 3, so he will bid something else. You are probably at the 3-level already. Now in order to find a 6-2 fit you will have to rebid your major a third time, or bid something below 3M so partner can support with 2. There's not much bidding room to do this on many auctions. There is always a trade off when making system decisions. The above issue is one of the many reasons I prefer playing strong club.

Strong club systems do well on hands like #2. Maybe in standard there should be rules about what promises extras, but in precision you've already defined 11-15 anyway so it doesnt matter as much and you can just bid what you have.

yeah people around here play extra shape or extra values, so any 5-5 is OK for 3m

Kxxx Axx K AKxxx You're playing inverted minors and you hear a single raise of your 1♣ opening from pard. You dont have any other agreements although you can assume partner is 'advanced' If you post 2NT, you are wrong. You dont have any agreements so partner could pass this. However you are pretty confident that partner will interpret 3x as a splinter and 3NT as 18-19 balanced

Double

Mild extras but not much if undiscussed and not playing any form of GB.

I would bid 3♣ since we're red at IMPs. Feels wrong, but I don't think I've adequately described my hand strength if I bid 2♣, then 3♦.

I don't think it's borderline. Penalty doubles are by far the best treatment IMO. Most of the people I see playing 14-16 tend to upgrade liberally into this range.

From the other responses it sounds like most people play optional doubles here. You should ask the same question for 1♣-(4♥)-? and see what the responses are.

Despite all the good things that can come from 1nt openings, i would definitely downgrade this hand against anyone I respected. If I open this hand 1NT it is because I am looking left and right, not at my cards.

I would double and bid, nice hand.

3N all pass. Oh, you meant my favorite realistic auction. 1♠-2♣-2♠-4♠. I really don't think I would find 3NT here. Maybe if north rebids 2NT and then either (a) passes a raise to 3NT or (be) rebids 3NT (!) over 3♠ then it would happen. I really don't see that happening with ♥J9x.

I wouldn't balance over 3♠ red at MPs. Otherwise I would. I don't know my limits =)

Move a club to diamonds and obv you should Stayman it

on both hands

The "book bid" with the first one would be 2♦. I cannot see bidding 2NT with xxx of hearts. And the idea of bidding 2NT on the second one with a small singleton diamond is ugly beyond words (maybe not beyond words, but certainly beyond words that I would use in this forum). If 3♣ is not a permissible bid in your methods (and it certainly should be) then the only real choice is 2♠. The next best choice would bid 2♥. 2NT does not appear on my radar screen unless it is an artificial call. (1) No, the "book" in my area says that suits actually show 4+ cards in that suit and 2NT is the default rebid for problem hands. Obviously 2♦ is a better call but it is not the "book" bid since the "book" only refers to hand strength, suit length etc w/o regard to honor location. (2) Did you realize I was referring to "if the response was 2♦" Raising clubs is obvious.

I think it's really funny how different 2/1 styles are around the world, even among good players. Around here people play rebidding the major shows 6, so the book bids would be 2NT with the first one and 3♣ with the second one, but I think most experts would bid 2♦ with the first one. That's what I'd do. If the OP intended to say that 2♦ was the response on the 2nd one, the book bid around here would be 2NT and I'd bid that without a 2nd thought.

I'd be too worried about a phantom

If bidding had worked out the conversation would have been: junior commentator: "The Swedish junior at the other table was too timid and passed. Really passing is borderline at best" other commentator: "I think passing is the sensible call on this hand, the overcall was quite lucky" junior commentator: "Most Juniors don't know what fear is. They may go for numbers sometimes, but they don't miss games. The Swedish junior is an exception, she bids more like an older person compared to others her age"

Does everyone think 3♥ is forcing? I think I'd have passed, put down my dummy, and said GLP (why cant P be 5-5?). For that matter do people think 2NT is forcing? I wouldn't have thought that either. I think with a good majors hand, RHO can bid 3♦ or 4♥ I tend to think bids are NF if there is doubt. 2♠ I'd interpret as forcing of course.

stiff ♣

(1) I'd pass. I think they will make a good pct of the time, I don't think we will make very often, and I think -300 vs whatever or -50 vs +50 is likely enough to make pass better than bidding 3♠. (2) I wouldn't have had the guts to pass 2♣x. I pass 3♦. Pard should know my hand, approximately, and is better placed to make the final call than I.

I like Mike's answer. re Phil, I think AKJxxx is too weak a suit for this 3♠ bid, AKJxxx Qx x AQx (add a 13th card in a round suit) looks like a double and pull to me.