MFA

When partner bids 3NT he says he doesn't have a suit. So ♠Kxx should not be overrated. But on the other hand, S might have stretched with the actual distribution, and this time he has surely not. 3♦ -> 3NT is unacceptable. It all depends on system, but N must show strong values. There are many possible ways, 3♦ -> 4NT natural 3♦ -> 4♣ -> cuebid 3♣ (if forcing) -> 4NT natural or 4♣ or cuebid 2NT (if natural forcing) -> 4♣ or 4NT 4♣ etc. Which to choose depends on what's available. South would be happy to cooperate towards slam.

Yes & yes, 2♠ & 3♠.

1♥. Most of the time I'll strongly prefer a 1-lvl overcall to a double with 4-5 in the majors and this hand is not really an exception.

I don't think that 5NT is wrong as such. But I would be more nervous about getting out of diamonds when we belong there than the other way around. Maybe partner bids 6♥ over 5NT which is very likely to be wrong. It seems rather clear however to try for slam over 5♦, I think.

6♦ for me. Although Codo's xx, xxx, Kxxxx, xxx hardly is enough for a good slam. Try a spade, spade defense...

Sigh..... :) :rolleyes: ROFL..Gerber is so hated here, but honestly in this sequence it has to be HATED. 4♣ is totally needed as natural !! Rule #1 although I should post this in B/I. If 4♣ can be natural it is not Gerber. Rule #2 for most of us. If 4♣ can be some sort of splinter it is not Gerber. I expect the rest of you to add a couple more rules for Gerber. Rule #3 if we are supposed to play sensible bridge then 4♣ is never Gerber.

Be sure to agree T/O doubles in the future. Clearly superior imo. :)

Spot on, and that does not only apply to a weak NT. An escape method that will not allow you to play 1NT doubled is not worth playing in my opinion. Personally I prefer Meckwell, but other methods are also playable. Roland I agree that there are hands that play better in 1NTX than in 2 of a suit. But it is not necessarily so easy to identify them in the bidding. The real trouble for the weak NT is when the combined strength is very low. In those cases it is usually the percentage action for responder to run with any 4-4 and hope for trump tricks. But sometimes this is unsuccessful, for instance because the fit is bad, the opps are able to draw trumps or perhaps able to get ruffs. Etc. These things are hard to know when one chooses to stay or to run.

I think that logic is flawed. The 4♦ bidder accepted to play 5♠, why should the player who suggested to play ♠ in the first place now remove himself? Only his partner can judge if he prefers to play ♦ or ♠. After the double there is reason to assume that the estimated missing ♠ don't split 3-3 or 2-3 this makes a ♠ contract a lot less attractive. Since everybody except me thinks that 5♠ includes ♦ support, playing 6♦ is a lot more attractive. The 4♦-bidder accepted to play 5♠ undoubled. No surprise, since he is NV vs V and the opponents are in a forcing, slamgoing sequence (5♥ was a slam try). We can deduce little about the 4♦-bidder's degree of spade fit, when he passes 5♠ undoubled. This could have been done on a void if he thought it would be clever for tactical reasons. After the double, business are serious. The 5♠ bidder must tell his partner, if 5♠X is a possible final contract or not facing a 4♦ preempt. Passing shows that 5♠X is in the picture, which means that he has some kind of a real spade suit, not just a lead director. I don't think that there is a particular reason to think that spades breaks badly because 5♠ got doubled. The opponents' primary concern is to judge whether or not they should bid the slam. When they stop to double they will usually just be short of values for bidding on.

No genius here. I would just finesse the spades. I try low to the queen to guard against the singleton K to my left. I'm pretty confident that righty has the last diamond, so I not so afraid of the handling problems, should west have a small singleton spade instead of the king.

What else besides the 5th trump and an ace do we have that is good for slam? The ♥JT, ♦QJ, and ♠Q.

Double. I won't try to be a hero on this one. Partner is a big favourite to have at least some wasted heart values. And even if we find our magic 8-card fit slam, bad breaks might do us in.

I didn't play this hand, it was an appeal case. The crucial point is that when partner bids 5♠ and passes the double, he is willing to play in spades. He has the responsibility to remove himself if not. So partner can't any longer have some 4-card spade suit that just wants a lead. If we pull to 6♦, there could be 2 reasons: 1) We don't trust partner 2) We think that partner's suggestion to play in spades is such a weak one that we don't have the right hand to accept. It has merit for sure that partner's pass is only a mild suggestion that requires a big spade fit to be left in. But it is a rather subtle agreement. For all we know partner might have a flawed hand for a preempt. Aces, voids etc. For some people there could even be a gap between a preempt and a 1-bid, if they preempt so aggressively NV vs V that they can't stand to do it also on a 10-count or some such. Surely partner won't be suggesting 5♠ that often, so it's fair to assume he don't have an everyday hand. If this came up with my regular partner, I would pass 5♠X. Playing with an unfamiliar partner, I would probably pull to 6♦. ;) As you have guessed by now the actual north was all-in on finding partner with spades+diamonds and south chose to pull. When deciding if pass is a logical alternative, it must be so to trust partner. Here we have an ok hand for spades. I think the "very weak suggestion to play 5♠X" is relatively far-fetched and it can't overturn that judgement. If a strong partnership can handle this expert interpretation at the table, fine, but please no silly UI jibberish-explanation underway :).

Ok, lol, I thought this problem was about if we should in any way open up for slam exploration with a cheaper bid than 4♠. Maybe partner's 2♥ could be first step with a strong hand, I don't know. Surely we are in game now.

2♦ would be natural. 2♥: Michaels, 2NT: minors, 3♣: ♣+♠, 3♦: ♦+♠. Everything else natural.

[hv=d=n&v=e&s=s65h7dakt876ct962]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Pass - (1♥) - 4♦ You have agreed to play a ghestem variation, so 3♦ was not an option (would be ♠+♦). Therefore you decide to push it to 4♦. Ok? Ok! The bidding continues: Pass - (1♥) - 4♦ - (5♥), 5♠ - (pass) - pass You are a moderately experienced partnership, and 5♠ might be some 'modern' bid. But why bid now? Pass and see what west does. They are slamgoing and in a force. Ok? Ok! Pass - (1♥) - 4♦ - (5♥), 5♠ - (pass) - pass - (X), pass - (pass) - ??? Pass or pull? When you have made up your mind, please read the hidden text below:

I have (of course) not. Do you have a more specific point with this post?

I think there is an aspect more to this combination. Plan (7) should be low towards the ace, not to cash the ace. If west plays the 9 he has KJ9, K9, J9 or 9 if he is honest. (1) handles 3 of these, (7) only 2. So when we see the 9, we should change to (1). He can falsecard 9 from 96, 94 or 964 however. The equlibrium occurs when he falsecards 1/3 of the time! This is game theory. If he falsecards more often, we should choose (7), if he falsecards less often (1)! We have to evaluate this. This also has impact on our plan when west plays the 6 or 4. If he falsecards a lot, 96, 94 and 964 becomes less likely and (1) thus more favoured. There will be an equlibrium position here too, where (1) and (7) are equally likely to succeed, depending on west's tendency to falsecard with the 9 and east's tendency to falsecard with the J from J9!

(1) also picks up J96. Thus (1) gets 14 3-2s and 3 4-1s; (7) gets 13 3-2s and 4 4-1s. A specific 3-2 is more likely than a specific 4-1, so (1) is better. (7) usually handles J9 as well. East won't falsecard very often.

Clear-cut to act earlier. If I were to take over from this point, I would try 3♦. If partner has the right hand, we could have a million tricks in diamonds. We could belong in spades, but unfortunately we are now in a guessing position.

I'm truly sorry, but... LOL

Some here play 2♠ as exactly limit with 3 hearts.

Cold? No spade ruff possible? :(

Double. I have a strong preference for this bid.

If someone would bid 3NT after partner has alerted 2NT, then I'll wish him very good luck in the committee. He will need it. :D