Hanoi5

♠Q

I was gonna blame North for not doubling 2♦ but the guy is void in hearts and so I put it all to South. But North could get some 5-10% blame.

I'd prefer double to show a penalty oriented hand usually with no heart fit. Here I would bid 3♥, to show partner that I have a fit and want to compete.

♣A♦K

Partner saw declarer's ♠A and ♣A, why wouldn't he ask for a heart with the Queen?

Even though the quality of the heart suit is nice it clearly isn't a suit worth playing with against a void. I think opening 1♥ is not dangerous (in the sense that we'd be left playing there), but I don't think it solves the problem anyway. 1♥-1♠ 3♣-3♦ 3♥- And I'm lost from there. Maybe 4♦ and then 5♦ over 4♥, but I don't know.

Kxx AKQxx Kxx 9x

Then I don't know. But a small heart should be the Queen and maybe a small club just means he controls the suit and we shouldn't worry, just cash the hearts? I'm not underleading my hearts without help from partner. Or do you also play upside down preference?

Who am I playing with? Can partner think I have a doubleton club and is encouraging me to continue? I think I'll play my top hearts, even though a singleton ♥Q isn't as likely as a small card.

When I went through the facts I believed there was no foul in the hand, as someone made a mistake and then tried to correct their mistake which could have gone very wrong(?). However, what if the hesitation was made 'cause responder couldn't think of a hand with 9 winners and only 2 KC? Then it sort of alerted opener to look at his/her hand again and reconsider, which is what happened when he realized he had another ace. I'm not sure this is covered in the laws and would end up being a judgement call from the Director and committee but there's room for a lot of discussion and argument.

Actually, bridge players live in a sort of bizarre world. The question here however is, how many people expect (3x)-4NT to be natural, how likely are you to get that kind hand and what's more useful: to describe a strong two-suiter or to describe a stronger than normal NT type of hand when one of the opponents holds a one suiter. Then I maintain that 4NT as natural is bizarre. Of course with pre-emptives getting weaker by the minute and anyone being able to play anything you have every right to agree this treatment with your partner. But it reminds me of the story about the Italians playing a very complicated system for the strong 4441, and then one day one of them got the hand for it, and he didn't use the convention!

1. I don't understand why I bid 3♠ instead of 2. 2. I'm VERY tempted to bid 5♣. Partmer might hold 5♥'s but he passed as dealer, they might go down just because the hand is a freak, but I feel so guilty passing a doubled contract with such an offensive hand; I mean, their hands might be like this too and they might make the game by taking three diamonds and crossruffing the rest! 3. I'd lead a very creative ♣K, in case I decide to pass.

You have just exposed yourself as being from Madrid instead of being from Barcelona. I bet Dalí is rolling in his grave from your comments. To remain on topic, I have been downloading some movies as of late and watched 'The Adjuster'. A film by Atom Egoyan which would make David Lynch very proud.

6♦. 4♦ should be enough but I don't want to risk it, 3NT is very pessimistic, 4♣ will eventually lead to a NT contract (partner will very likely think we have hearts so s/he'll convert ♦'s to ♥'s and we'll have to settle for NT) and so I don't feel scientific about this one. If 4NT is natural we just moved to a bizarre world; partner is more likely to think we have the reds than to pass or continue in NT.

[hv=pc=n&s=sat93h8743dt8ca75&w=sj87hkt62dkqj96c2&n=sq64haj9d7432cj86&e=sk52hq5da5ckqt943&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=pp1np2cp2dp3nppp]399|300[/hv] I'm not quite sure about the exact bidding sequence but that was surely the contract (and the declarer). The thing is that the ♠10 was led, East asked about leading agreements and North responded they led 3rd and 5th. East put up the ♠J and ended up down one. I guess there should be no redress as east goes down no matter what he plays to the first trick. It is even naive to think they'd lead the 10 from AQTx (but it could be AQT9(x)?). The thing is that I'd like to know what should the proper answer be to the question: How do you lead? and whether the asker or the answerer should pursue the matter further in a case like this. Or for example, someone leads the Ace and the question is made, can the answer be: '3rd and 5th'? Thanks for clearing this up for me.

3NT.

I'm not quite sure, but it might have been 1♦-2NT-3NT.

3NT as 4♦ seems too much.

[hv=pc=n&w=s752hq97dqcaqt642&e=sakj8hak6d6542ck5&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=3cp3nppp]266|200[/hv] Down one after a diamond lead from AKT98. At the other table the bidding went: [hv=d=w&v=0&b=8&a=pp1dp2cp2sp2np3nppp]133|100[/hv] Who do you blame?

[hv=pc=n&s=sk52hkqt3dcakt632&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1c1s2hp2sp3dp3hp4hp4sp5hppp]133|200[/hv] This is as high as I think you can get. Unless you 'envision' partner's ♠Q and take the plunge to 6. Or maybe you bid 6♣ over 5♥ and partner 'understands' you have problem with your spades and bids 6♥. But I think it's risky.

I think ruffing a heart is not a very good idea. In fact ruffing without a purpose in the long trumps hand is a very noobie play. Here you have two reasons for entering with the spade ace, first you don't want to ruff to enter your hand to finesse spades and second it is usually best to play an honour before finessing the queen.

I don't know if I would. Partner didn't act over 1♦ but it could be 'cause he has 4 'forever'. I lean more towards double.

So you'd double even though you don't play ELC? I understand this is a very 'weird' hand but according to the program both sides can make 6 tricks in diamonds. East held ♠T98x♥Qx♦AQ7xxx♣x. I was wondering whether any of the players could 'do' something after double, this wasn't online bridge but a team match in an important tournament. Or if I was just resulting.

I have never stopped watching a movie willingly. No matter how bad it is, I have to watch it till the end 'cause I'm always hopeful something good can come out of it. My wife always complains that I choose bad movies. I have seen quite a number of bad films and some that I haven't understood. Like Lost Highway by David Lynch.

[hv=pc=n&s=sxxhtxxxdt8cakxxx&n=saxhaj98dkj9xxcjx&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1s2dppdppp]266|200[/hv] -500