bluecalm

Why not ? They can't play in 4♦ anymore. He may think they makes often and bid 5♥ as cheap sacrifice. I think bidding 6♥ with N hand is absurd.

I am probably out of touch with English bridge terminology then. I thought limit raise = invite to game. Can you please tell me what limit raise is ? My simulation (on 1000 hands) tells me game makes 62% of cases opposite balanced 12-13 with exactly 5hearts. Of course this is double dummy but those should be pretty accurate.

I think they will make about one time in 4. Still I pass. Probably if we can make 3NT we can collect 500+ and I don't want to go automatic minus if partner is weakish.

Of course if you have an agreement (very reasonable one) that cuebid below game is mandatory even from strong hand once cuebidding is started S is to blame because he has hidden ♦ cue. I am not if this agreement is standard. I think for many people 4♦ would be move forward (or LTTC). I also don't think this problem would be here if S just violated agreements. The rule I strongly believe in is this: if you slam is not very good opposite perfect minimum you don't invite it. Here you need ♥Qxxx and ♦AKxx and still slam isn't laydown I don't think this hand is slam invite. You can't deny they are too strong for simple raise though. I think we would hear more from OP if 3♥ promised 4♥.

I think you guys should forget about N hand and picture average limit raise with ♣ cuebid. Qxx Qxx xx AQxxx KJx Qxx xxx KQxx etc. etc. Also N didn't "cooperate". His hand is limited and partner's is not (as opener can have even slam force opposite limit raise within his 1♥ opening) his 4♣ cuebid is mandatory. After judgment blunder which North made on first round of bidding his hand is huge opposite slam try. I mean, if we don't accept slam tries with a hand which is more powerful than any hand we should have in this position what is the point of bidding at all ?

I agree. I also think N has easy t/o double over 2♥.

Is 3♥ limit raise ? If yes then lol. This hand is clear GF. Then S made a slam try and N having this mega monster (having made limit raise) signed off. N - 100% blame. I don't understand why N should bid 4♥ after 4♣ indicating shortness. If anything I would prefer 6♥.

Every time it goes: 1NT - 2♦ 2♠ - 3♦* 3♥ - 4♥ intead of : 1NT - 2♦ 3♥ - 4♥ You lose something as they got a chance to dbl both 2♠ and 3♦ (and possibly more bids if you ask after 2♠ and the stop in game). I doubt the additional precision in slam/game bidding you got makes up for all those loses.

Just to make sure, 2♠ shows extras but it natural ? (ie. 3card?) If yes my favorite toys tells me the game makes only in 32% of cases even opposite hands which would accept our invite (17hcp hcp with 3-5-3-2 or 16-17 with 3-5-4-1). Pass seems the best, especially at MP's when just playing in ♠ will give you a great score.

Not worth it. In vast majority of hands you will be in partscore/game and then you will regret saying the defense that much about your hand. This is why this idea: Is much better choice. If I were to choose I would play: 2♥ = most of hands 3♥ = maximum with 4trumps other bids = non existent I think its both the simplest and the best.

If you change K♦ to Q♦ I still always overcall. Change K♦ to J♦ and I would like to play a style when it's still always overcall but I unfortunately I would have to pass this with some partners.

Rodwell's hand: [hv=s=s72hkj72dt43caj86]133|100|[/hv]

Imo 4♦ shows extras. I am not sure if it should be 4♥-5♦ or cuebid in ♥ (or last train lilke Jlall suggested) but for sure I won't bid that with 0count.

Meck bid 4♥ which was passed out. I think he has clear 6♥ now or RKCB first 6♥ later. It seems that general opinion in this thread is the same as mine. I format the .lin files in such a way that one click of "next" in viewer is only one bid/card. Then I open those files in old bbo client. Hide all cards with the exception of my favorite player (usually Meck or Versace). Then I use always on top window to hide results from other table. This way I see the situation before every card and bid made by my favorite player and I try to guess what he did. I learnt lot this way about style of top world players. I am very often able to say something like : "Meck would do that but Versace would do that". I reccomend it as it's fun and educational. (also one more thing I learnt is that this dreaded "meckwell" bidding system is really simple in most situations. They just have a lot of agreements for unusual situations. In like 95% of hands it's possible to guess Meck's bids and most misses are due to judgement not system issues).

While watching vugraphs archives trying to guess Meck's actions (seeing only his cards, stopping action every time it was his turn to play) I came across this hand: Spingold final. Opponents are Lauria - Versace. You are in Meck's shoes. [hv=d=w&v=n&s=sk85haq53dakq8ck9]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Pass - Pass - 1♠ - dbl Pass - 3♥ - Pass - 3♠ Pass - 4♣ - Pass - ?? You options are couebids, RKCB, signoffing in game and bashing slam. Thoughts ? Style notes: LV are notorious for opening light in 3rd. Your partner always open the bidding with 11hcp and often does with nice 10's (like 5-4 with no wasted values and good spots).

It's a pity in my opinion that 3NT is natural after 3♠ but all is not lost: 1♠ - 2♦ 2♠ - 3♠ 3NT - 4♦ = cuebid ♦, no ♣ cuebid, slam invite Now if partner doesn't have ♣ cuebid he will sign off and we will pass. If he has ♣/♦ cuebid he will realize that as we invite slam opposite his minium hand lacking ♣ cb he has perfect values for us and won't signoff. If he has both ♣ and ♥ cuebid he will bid 4♥. Seems simple ?

3♥. Even opposite decent 7-8 count we will often lose a trick in every suit or even two in ♥. I don't think 4♥ makes nearly often enough opposite hands which don't raise to 4♥ themselves and by bidding 4♥ we mislead partner in case he has a strong hand. EDIT: Just noticed it's between 3♥ and pass. WTF !

Yeah jumping in old suit is invitational according to classical principles. Something like 15-17hcp (or even 14 with a lot of playing strength). It's sad state of affairs that the system most people learn first and play for most of their bridge life makes you to come up with such artificial, difficult to handle solutions in the most simple of situations :(

nvm

You are vul, opponents are not. It goes: Pass - 1♥ - 2♣ - 2♥ 3♣ - 3♥ - Pass - Pass ???? Suppose double is for penalty here (feel free to comment if you disagree). What is the sample minimum hand you need to have to double here ? How it would change in other vuls ? My thinking is that I would need a pretty good hand, basically "trap" like : xx AQJx Qxxx xxx because it's not clear if they pushed too much and turning 50 into 100 won't get many MP's while there is a chance -140 will be common result. Thoughts ?

I take back what I wrote about it being close. After reconsidering I think 3♥ is a mistake. It won't be safe contract often enough because we often face minimum with stiff ♥ and even opposite minimum with ♥xx it's not big favorite to make.

It depends how you define constructive. We have decent hand and 3D is going to make more often than not. If you mean "promising defensive values" I know it's common understanding but I think it's just plain wrong.

In my opinion it's borderline but not worth an invite. I don't have time for any simuls now so it's purely based on intuition.

I might try 4♦ if nonvul. Here it's too high for me. I bid 3♦. I have pretty good hand and good partner won't double them in partscore "because I promised something by raising".

Thanks for this post. Well, it's a bit unfair the other way around. The purpose was to see how often I will make game opposite hands which accept an invite and probably not all balanced 12's do :)