MFA

Why not? Because we would be implying a degree of precision in our ruling that is really not there. I don't understand that. Can you elucidate? Ok. If we make a 7-way weighted score, it will be along these lines: A 40% B 27% C 14% D 8% E 5% F 4% G 2% We can't really claim to have a good justification for numbers like that. On the other hand, if we adjust to 1 (or 2 or perhaps 3 at most) scores, it seems clear that we are giving it our best shot at a reasonable ruling. Which is just what we are doing. For the same reason, a 2-way weighted score shouldn't be 77-23 or something, but round numbers like 50-50, 75-25 or 60-40. It is not exact science and we shouldn't pretend it is.

Sad. It's known to be a winning contract from time to time. :) Maybe if I give him an intensive course in puling up the 3NT-card he will learn how to do it?! It is not that hard, I think... :)

Why not? Because we would be implying a degree of precision in our ruling that is really not there.

Pass for sure.

3♠, regardeless of what you say our agreements are. I really want to involve partner here even if it is imperfect. Second choice is 4♥. 3NT is gambling on running hearts & a club stopper & 4 losers in spades (incl ruff(s)), too narrow a target if partner can't bid it over 3♠.

Yes sure, I buy that. A weighted score between 5♣-2 and 5♣-1. What irritates me here is that I know that many outcomes other than 5♣ would have been possible. But we can't really include them all in a big 7-8 way weighted score mix, can we? My 5♣ suggestion could be seen as an attempt at a 'middle of the road' compromise.

The club discard T1 would almost always be from 5 or 6 clubs, and never from 4. I would have cashed at least 2 more hearts and then played clubs from the top. West won't have ♣Kx (but perhaps stiff king) and east would be very likely to discard another club from a 6card suit, since it's tough to play me for a 5422 type with no info.

I agree.

Could be nice to know if NS had agreement about lebensohl etc. Back to 3♣, or if not in the generous mood then a weighted score between 3NT and 3♣.

I feel strongly that the defense should only get one more trick.

NS gave misinformation about their system. It's perfectly allright not to have an agreed defense against unusual methods, but they should say so. I would be willing to accept that 3♠ was caused by the misinformation and should be rolled back. This is supported also by the fact that east did reach for the pass card before the alert. East's 3♠ is not a thing of beauty in the context of the actual explanation, but I don't think it's so far off (wild or gambling) that EW should be losing their compensation. I would probably adjust to 5♣-2 (for both sides). It seems like a likely outcome that south will insist on clubs and they will end up in 5. Misguess the J to go down 2. Penalty points should not be relevant on this board. I'm definitely having problems with assigning weighted scores. I think it's hard when the infraction occurs very early in the bidding, since one of the beauties of our game is the wide range of possible bids and plays in so many situations. 'What would have happened' could be hard to predict.

Luxury hand. Modern means that pass over 1♣ denies a 5card major... :) aguahombre Yes that's the problem. We can only bid once unless forced so we have to choose. If we bid 1♠ we hope to be able to take a preference to 2♥ later. Otherwise our fit will probably remain hidden.

Double for sure. I'm not even considering 1♥, when I have adequate length in all three suits. My lower limit with this shape is about 12 hcp here - I'd double some 12's and pass some 12's. Had the opening been 1♠ I would generally need 13 hcp to double with 3433.

Why? The "D" could be misinterpreted as a bid of 0♦, accepted by next hands 2♥ bid. I would have thought D = 1D = 1♦, just like in the good old math days...

Ok, I ran, which happened to be a big success. Partner had an almost out-of-character 4-card overcall, so I really don't know if I was just lucky or if I made the percentage decision. [hv=n=sa8haj7xdkxcj97xx&w=skjxxhxdjtxxcakqx&e=s2hkqt86dqxxxxctx&s=sqt9754h932da4c86]399|300|[/hv] West doubled 2♠, and everybody passed. +470 after west led the ♣A. I could just work on clubs.

Pretty wide range, a reasonable hand or better. I usually explain it as just below opening strength or better. And always 5-5. N vs V we start a bit lower. At the 3-level a Michaels shows an opening hand for sure with ok suits. Our style is to bid aggressively opposite the Michaels, so that 'Michael' doesn't have to bid again unless he has significant extras. I don't like a weak or very strong approach. The intermediate hands are very common and the most valuable hands to use the convention with.

Damage control. The spade suit will give tricks if spades are trumps - not if hearts are trumps. Give partner ♠J (a nice card) out and we are only down 3 in 2♠. He might have more useful cards than that. 2♥X could potentially go for an unlimited number if they more or less can draw trumps against us. -- Partner could have a crappy hand and/or a very crappy 5card suit. But I don't expect him to have only 4 hearts very often. If he does, he will have a good reason for overcalling.

I play along the same lines as gnasher and Frances. The other major is a cuebid opposite a 5card suit. But there are downsides sometimes. Had this one tuesday (MP): Ax, AKJ9xx, Qxx, Ax I doubled 2♦ (too strong for 2♥) and it went P*-3♠-P... (* undiscussed if to play. Is that btw problematic?) I was forced to try 3NT which happened to be a success since partner had a flattish hand. She was nervous about being left in 2♦X.

Natural.

I don't understand not raising. Why not? Please explain, I really don't get it. I would most likely not double, but I'm not very brave in that department.

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sqt9754h932da4c86]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] (1♣) - 1♥ - (pass) - 2♥ (DBL) - pass - (pass) - ? East passed 2♥X very quickly. But the pace of the match was generally high. Partner's overcalling style is 'modern'. How about a fancy retreat to 2♠? (Bonus-?: Do you agree with 2♥?)

Codo WesleyC Soft values are not good enough for NT when it's all about tempo. We need fast tricks, a running suit and aces. We will be bidding 3NT on 21-23 a lot of the time, so there is simply not time to get all the deep tricks. So while the responding hand is NTish, it's not particularly 3NTish opposite a 2♣ overcall. Partner needs to provide an excellent suit, a little help in spades + even more tricks, since 6 club tricks + 1 spade trick is only 7. The actual overcall is very good in that department and should make a constructive move if at all possible. A good hand for 2NT instead of X would contain a club honour, (at least) one ace + of course reasonably good stoppers in both majors. Very solid stoppers in both majors could compensate, but the actual ♠Qxx is not at all like that.

Ah yes, sorry, should have refreshed my memory about the hand before I posted. I agree that it's down two then.

It's easy to say when everything is exposed, but I like 2♠. Of course we can have game, when we have so many tricks in our hand. I think partner's double was perfect. Less encouraging towards 3NT than 2NT would have been, and that seems just right with somewhat soft values and no fitting club high card. We, not partner, have the good hand here, so to say.

If they play that defense, I think I should be allowed to reconsider. After East has shown ♦AK, ♥KJ, I'm going to play a spade to the ace. Then I can finesse twice in trumps and exit in spades, endplaying west. Isn't that correct?