Apollo81

Must partner be 5-5 here? If so, must he have a hand too strong for "weak Michaels" If yes, yes, then I see your point. Actually I guess it's not that easy to construct a hand where 4h is a bad contract.

1. Yes, but only because I dislike all other calls more than I dislike pass. Playing with a partner who rarely makes 4 card overcalls I would probably raise to 2♠. 2. Why shouldn't a 3m bid here be similar to a "3.5 heart" bid? Seems right. I would bid 3♣ and if pard bids 3♦ then I would bid 4♥.

What hannie said.

I'd be a little worried that partner will think I have 3 hearts if I bid 3♥.

I agree with Justin on this one. I think the North hand is a little better than other people seem to and South could have passed 1♠ so his hand can't be that bad.

3♥. 2nd choice is 2NT. I don't think the shape and poor heart intermediates warrant a double and pull. edit: this is MPs so I am not about to play in 3m here

I'd bid 4♥. The suit is chunkier, more likely to draw a 4♠ bid, and is only 10 tricks for the game bonus.

Double for sure. I have too much D and O to pass, and this looks a lot more like a three suited hand than a two suited hand.

I would upgrade #1 and hog the declarership on #2 for positional reasons.

I play a similar structure: 1♣: strong/artificial 1M: 5+ cards, limited 1NT: 14-16 2♣: 11-15-, 6+♣ or xx45 with strong clubs. No 4-card major. 2♦: 11-15-, 5+♦, 4+♣. No 4-card major. 2M: weak two 2NT: 10-13 HCP, 4♥, 6+♣. --- 1♦: everything else This structure is designed to avoid the problems that Adam points out, plus fix a few of the problems in his structure (admittedly creating a few others). The strengths, compared to what Adam uses, are: (1) There is no chance of missing a 4-4 major fit after 2♣/2♦.♦ (2) After a 2m opening, responder does not need to look for a major fit if his longest major is 4 cards. Thus when responder declares notrump after one of these openings, the opening leader has a harder time. (3) Negative doubles after the 2m openings are unnecessary, so you can play penalty doubles at all levels. (4) Much more accurate auctions when responder has a strong hand after 2♦ opening. Some neutral factors: (1) The 2NT opener often generates a large swing when it comes up. So far I have found these to be overwhelmingly positive, though this opener has the potential for a large negative swing as well. Even if this bid generates an expected positive swing, the inherent swinginess of the bid makes it somewhat undesirable. (2) The 2♦ opener above is, at the same time, more and less well defined than Adam's 2♦ opener. His 2♦ opener has a smaller playing strength range than this one does, because a 5-5 14 count is quite a bit better than a 5-4 11 count, whereas his opener is usually a single suited 13 count +/- a Queen. However, more of opener's cards are known (9 compared to 6) after this 2NT opener, making it easier for responder to get maximum preemptive effect on the first round. The weaknesses are: (1) 1♦ opening is a wider range of patterns. Difficult to design system to accomodate all hand types in all auctions. (2) We play 2♦-2♥ as an artificial inv+ bid. Thus 2♦ opener can potentially miss a heart fit when responder is too weak to invite. Solve this by opening many 1354 hands 1♦, which reduces the frequency of the 2♦ opener and increases the frequency of the 1♦ opener, which is itself a potential weakness.

♠A ♥J108xx ♦Jxxx ♣xxx MPs all white 1♠-1N 2♥-? (1) would you bid 3♥? (2) what's the minimum change to make it a 3♥ bid

He should meet her because he will probably regret it if he doesn't. He shouldn't go in with any expectations, and if he wants to know how she feels about him he should just ask her and in general be as straightforward and open as possible. I don't think they can be friends, given their history.

Either what Josh said, or if responder passes then (1d)-p-(p)-X (p)-1h-(p)-1N all pass I don't see why the strong hand should bid 2N over 1d (which is 20-22 in my mind). Even if it was 19-21 I might downgrade it because A-J-nothing is not worth 5 HCP.

6d is a much better contract than a club slam. All it needs are diamonds 4-2 or 5-1 with stiff dJ.

The result of the hand is pretty irrelevant. Pard had 6142 shape with the dK and some other irrelevant cards and will pull NT to diamonds. If you had bid 2N you have an easy 3h over pard's 3d then 5d over pard's 4d. If you had bid 3n youll just raise 4d to 5.

Obv this is never discussed, so I would interpret it very loosely at the table. I would play it as KJ9xx or better - basically a hand with 5+ diamonds where it is safe for pard to lead a diamond from nearly any holding. I don't think I've ever seen this auction. Someone psyched?

Since we're on the topic of taxes, what do people think about this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_tax

No one is worried that 2N is an underbid? Offline most people answered 3N.

To all the 4♦ bidders: pard now bids 4♥. Your call.

You should definitely defend their 1m openings as Standard because they will be the same as Standard almost all the time. Any defense that includes a penalty double over their 1NT is fine. I wouldn't frivolously interfere over that 2♦ if I were you since it shows a big balanced hand. It will be easy for them to punish such interference.

even 2 over 2? how about these auctions (1h)-2d-(p)-2s (p)-2n (1h)-2d-(p)-2s (p)-3c I would have said these are both NF, but I wasnt sure about 2 over 2 (the 2s bid). I thought that 2 over 1 was NF

New suit by Advancer: forcing or NF-constructive? at 1-level 2-level over 1-level overcall 2-level over 2-level (non jump) overcall

All red imps --- AK9xx AQJxxx J10 (1h)-2d-(p)-2s (p)-?

Axx --- AKJxxxx KJx (2s)-? all red, IMPs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightner_double