marcD

I think it is a matter of being consistent . For me the 1st hand is a 2♣ opening (I do not want my partner to make creative 1NT calls) , 1♠ is far more likely to end the auction) while on the second 1♠ by responder feels automatic so I have no worry and open 1♦

I'd open 1♥; minimum hand for 3♠ rebid over 1NT or 2m in my methods (showing a weak 6-5). Passing could work well (if opponents bid minors or NT) but all pass is a possibility and I will not always get a chance to describe my hand

Clearly depends on your definition of DBL. If it means Do Something Intelligent then dbl is a standout (partner is expected to pull with spade shortage). If you do not have this agreement then I guess 5♥ but your are essentially bidding partner's hand /assumed shortage (opponents could well have only 9 trumps)

Sorry thought the consensus was to lead a pedestrian small spade. DS keeps entry fluid for defense if spades are 6223 in case partner does get in and does not tip declarer to go after say clubs instead of diamonds . Answer does not seem obvious to me . I do have sympathy for the SQ leader

Easy to make fun of this lead but I do not think it was a genius lead : it caters to J or Jx in dummy when partner has no entry (since you are looking at the DK it is a definite possibility that you will be on your own). Interesting bid from South (and from North too unless he has a diamond fit)

I kind of like it : the 1♦ opening can be stronger than in the original polish and that address one of the major flaws of the system according to my experience : showing Diamonds after a 1♣ can be difficult. They probably (hopefully) have good agreements in place after interference over their 1♣ opening : the default hand is no longer a weak no trump as unbalanced weak club opening are frequent too (easy to loose club fit if you always assume weat no trump type)

Never . Actually I bid 3♦ with 4M333 and partner can relay if interested .

This may not be simple but let's keep it simple : 4♣ agrees S so 4NT is keycard for spades. That would be my interpretation in a casual partnership . The only way to address a possible misundertanding would be to bid a 5NT pick a slam but that could open a can of worms.

Even playing Non Forcing NT and non constructives raises I think 1NT is misguided: over 2 x (minor or hearts) from partner 2♠ will sound as a mere preference and could could easily play 2♠ while 3NT is cold

points (penalty oriented ) at pairs , t/o at imps (small doubleton spade or Ax in a fair balanced hand). Partner may have 4 spades and leave it in . Don' t see how i could have a penalty double with long trumps over mine

Your hand is tightly defined ; not sure why you would need 3NT (serious/non serious). Anyway I consider this hand to be a maximum although it has only 15HCP . I see two ways to proceed : 3NT to hear a club control or 4♣ to hropefully hear partner cue bid the ♦K (since we play strong NT i have a diamond suit so I assume partner will not cue bid a singleton. So the short answer is cue bid is a no brainer , which cue bid is a matter of partnership agreement (I guess 4♣ is the standard approach)

1♥ ; possibly wrong but that what the field will do (I might get a chance to bid diamonds next) . I think dbl is a close second. Not 2NT (will bury spades). 1♦ can work but it is a bit extreme

I think this has little to do with lebensohl but rather with your agreement against Landy or equivalent. If you normally play that over 2♣ majors 2M shows stopper and 3M shows shortage I would continue playing the same with x showing Heart values . Therefore 3NT is to play

The real life score is 5♥ -12 (doubled !) , Pass -8, double -6 if partner does not pull (-12 otherwise) [hv=d=n&v=b&n=sq8642ht9d8ca6543&w=skt9hj862da762cq9&e=sjhak543d43ckjt72&s=sa753hq7dkqjt95c8]399|300|Scoring: XIMP[/hv] We do not use adjective bidding in France either so the meaning of double is supposed to be defined in the partnership, but i was interested to see what is the maintream approach to this kind of problem Guess we lost the board when North decided his hand was a Vulnerable Muiderberg opening. 3♥ may not be to everyone's taste but 4♣ leaping micheal (forcing) seemed a bit too rich on that moderate collection Playing transferable values I think this hand is closer to pass than dbl(agree with Mikeh, this is more like i will win the post mortem dbl) but I had some sympathy for 5♥ which seems a sensible choice at IMP (the risk I was referring to was the double game swing, unlikely but possible). thanks for your answers/ debate

Do not know if we can lump weak two bids altogether : - I think 2♠ is extremely useful (although playing Muiderberg + multi instead seems to work) - I have mixed feelings about 2♥ ; the preemptive value is marginal + you risk pushing opponents to a making 4♠ - I think 2♦ is extremely effective but the price too pay is probably too high in terms of constructive bidding I have also played, the 1.5 opening approach in the past but frankly results were not convincing . Some restrict them to M+clubs for constructive bidding purposes but then the frequency is too low to bother

I do not like 1♦ (lead directing ?) and since 2♦ is not available, it is either 3♦ pr PAss. I have found that 3♦ works more often that it should (and since by agreement it can be almost anything partner will not rush to lead diamond). Think it is a close call , will go with the field and pass if not the right time for swingy action (doing very well or just not the right momentum)

We play 2♦ shows 5+H 10+ or 6+ 8+ - 2♥ waiting either 12-14 or 18+ - 2♠ misfit NF 6spades - 2NT and up 15-17 natural (4 level are splinters) over 2♥ - 2♠ game forcing artificial (2NT strong version, 3♣+ natural minimum) - 2NT 5H NF semi blanced - 3m 5H5m NF -3♥ NF we do bid 2♥ with D (GF exept 3D rebid). The heart fit finding is solved as follows. 3♣ by opener's partner shws hearts over 2♠ (12-14 or 18+) and 2NT (15-17 may be unbalanced with 4H) this works well with 1NT semi forcing and Gazilli (2♥ over 2♣ shows either 5-9 with 5 hearts or 5-7 with 6)

I must say pass is probably right but I would have opened anyway. Now my partner can never imagine I have such a hand + he has fair values for a minor opening in 4th seat so it looks like an easy 3NT. Actually I would have responded 1♦ to try to right side the contract

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=skt9hj862da762cq9]133|100|Scoring: XIMP 2♠ 3♥ 4♠ ? 2S muiderberg weak S + minor (5/4+, 5-10 HCP)[/hv] Reasonnably strong field

really strange idea to bid 2♦ instead of 2♠. Given that I would choose option 2 but why torture partner ?

probably depends on your agreements but I play that dbl is penalty here so easy pass for now. I'll double 1NT and bid 2NT if they run to 2♥

4♥ not double . If i double i could be waiting a long time for the next round of bidding. Unlikely but why take a chance ?

I play a similar scheme based on Ambra and 2♣ relay (derived from http://www.geocities.com/col3435/2CRelay.html) ; it works well , the only downside being that it does not occur that often and it is a fairly serious memorization effort (for my partners) the basic structure is over 1♠ : 2♣ GF relay or clubs INV+ , 2♦ Hearts inv+ , 2♥ diamonds inv+ over 1♥ : 2♣GF relay or clubs inv+, 2♦ diamonds inv+ 1NT is semi-forcing 'ambra styke) with 2♣ by opener Gazilli.

Standard french bidding over 2♦ GH is along these lines : - 2♥ no Ace - 2♠ Ace of Heart or Spade - 2NT 8+ HCP - 3♣ Ace of club - 3♦ A of Diamond -3♥ through 3NT 2 aces (same color, rank, mixed) some variation aound that scheme exist but do not think there are a big improvement; think you strike gold every three year or so but otherwise the approach is flawed (no to mention it requires a lot of work to deal with subsequent bidding for something which happens very rarely)

Interesting. Guess in France,mainstream attitude would be to pass west hand and reopen with 2H in east seat (at least it is consistent). I would probably double with West hand (think passing puts too much pressure on east) but that action would be marginal over here