bluecalm

You mean 5♥ as ERKCB to convince opponents to lead something different than ♥ ? :)

Thanks for the comments, some useful points about weak 1NT (I don't face it too often) I am very interested if you (or any other exp++/wc) player would come to different conclusion if he/she "looks into it deeper" with whatever constraints he/she chooses. I am interested in this situation because I feel in similar situations people (even very good players) are in general too cautious and they lose a lot of mp's/imps. While I am not easily convinced by "it intuitively wrong to dbl here" even by wc player (especially if I put some effort in forming my opinion) it would be much more persuasive to me if it was : "I looked into it and still passing seems right".

Hi, Is it possible to open .lin files using web client ? I can't find the option. It would be great if there was "load lin file" somewhere. Also it would be very useful if those files could contain many hands (like 100). Old client can't handle those correctly :)

Yeah, right. Here it was 11-14balanced without 5card major for opener. less than 13hcp for partner or less than 10hcp if 6card major; 0-9hcp with 6-7clubs without 5card major. I don't mean to say that 10 hands prove anything. In such problems I usually make loose constraints and then manually review hands skipping those which would bid otherwise (so here if partner is 5-5 with 5M and say 11hcp I would just skip this manually as he would've overcalled). Sometimes things are not clear but here hands where pass is right are quite rare. I consider this very good way to gain experience as I would need to play for 10 years to be in similar situation say 20 times. Btw, if you agree with me that reviewing hands in such a way is good way to improve intuition in given situations I can generate output file for you with given constraints. I am interested if other people would reach similar conclusion here.

I wouldn't rdbl. He can easily have KQx + A or something like that. Or even KQxx + A and we will be down 2 after ♥ leads.

The problem is that you may miss ♦ slam in sequence: 1♠ - 2♦ 2♠ - 3♣ 3♠ (most likely) and now there will be some confusion about meaning of 4♦ bid. I bid 3♦ with OP hand if that's forcing.

Or 500 if he has J9x of hearts for example :)

I double. I think that pass is "normal" (by this I mean the one chosen by most good players) action but my short bridge experience tells me passing leads to too many disasters (like us missing 10trumps game/partscore). To contribute something useful here are 10 first generated partner's hands (assuming we play t/o double and don't have natural 2♣/2♦ overcall) : J6 J65 AJTxxx Ax J73 KJ862 AJ J85 J94 KQ 9765 J742 JT63 KQ J87 9732 942 854 AKJ65 Q9 JT976 KQ854 T8 7 T732 K854 AK8 62 74 KJ9654 75 Q76 J74 K85 J96 J854 (well, here I wish I passed) J743 K842 AT8 J3 I reviewed some more. I don't believe passing is reasonable choice anymore unless partner is willing to reopen wildly which I think he shouldn't be. I think 3♠/dbl are close.

I am happy to double. My guess is that most very good players won't double though.

My intuition tells me 4NT is right. Simulation tells me that 6NT is making 72% of the time opposite exactly 15 balanced with 2-3♠ - 3♥ and no 6card suit. I am not sure how reliable it is in slams. I guess not very (slam more often depends on guessing something right than making right first lead). Overall. I bid 4NT but I imagine I could be easily convinced other way. EDIT: Even if partner has exactly 15hcp without 5card suit the slam is still making 71% of the time. Hmm.... Some generated hands where slam is making: KT9 QJ6 AKT Q432 ; do you want to be there ? KQ4 JT6 AQ64 K72 ; definitely not K2 Q92 AQJ9 KT98 ; again no ? Q52 QJ6 AK9 K752 ; not ! After reviewing some more hands I definitely don't bid 6NT.

Maybe I was to quick to discard those possibilities but it seems very likely that LHO would lead/switch to ♥ if he had a stiff there. He is also unlikely to be 6-5 in round suits as he (probably) would overcall with some kind of 2suiter. If hearts are 4-2 collecting 10tricks should be easy after ruffing 2clubs, returning to dummy with K♠ and playing Q♥ to guard against bad trump/♦ break. Are the assumptions about ♥ too optimistic ?

A♦. ♣ ruff. A♥. ♣ Ruff. K♠. Q♥. It wins even E has all 5spades and we don't concede our chances for and overtrick.

What do you guys think of 5♣ bid with actual hand ? I know values are slim but probably defense will be very cheap.

Playing more or less standard 2/1 with forcing 1NT and jumps as natural invitational. 1♠ - 1NT 2♦ - 2♥ ? [hv=s=sat954hkqdkt643ck]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] It's not hard to visualize a game if partner has Axxxxx !♥ it's even easier to visualize going down in 3♥. What do you bid ? Does vulnerability change your answer?

Scratch that I misread the auction.

Meckwell and Greco-Hampson use artificial structure (2♥ is 11-13bal, 2♠ is 4card support + shortness) etc. My feeling is that their choice was dictated by playing not forcing to game 2♣ and 2♦ (thus having 3♣/3♦ bid for weaker hands) because they need a way to bid with both invitational and GF hands and 2♠ relay after 2♥ response allows for that. I also feel that in their system you really should bid 1♥/1♠ with 5♣-4M and less than slam invitational hands. If those are forcing to game in your system I think you can get away with much simpler solution (and not having those "ugly" canape in your structure) I would go with this basic scheme: 2♦ = 5+diamonds 2♥/2♠ = natural 4+, without 5♦ 2NT = balanced without 4card major 3♣ = minimum but 4card ♣ support unbal 3♥/3♠ splinters with ♣ support (4+) Now in sequence: 1♦ - 2♣ 2♦ - 2♥/2♠ are 3rd suit may be values, may be 4card suit (partner bid 3NT with both 4card support and stopper in 4th suit; raise to 3 without stopper) If you have game forcing hand with clubs and don't have natural 3rd suit to bid you just bid 3♣ (this is a problem if you don't play 2♣ as GF). 1♦ - 2♣ 2NT - here I feel you may want to use 3♦/3♥/3♠ as shortness with 6♣; You have two free bids 3♦ and 3NT. You may want to assign 4-4-4-1 max hand to 3NT and 2-2-4-5 hand to 3♦ for example.

I am happy wit 4♥ now. I would like to invite the slam but I don't know how. I wouldn't pass 2♠ for sure though with this hand.

One more important thing is what do you do with GF hands with 4M - 5m. It's kinda easier to plan subsequent auction if you reply 1M with those.

Do we know that for sure ? Partner would play a 6 from Q6.

Tough luck imo. CA could be a good play if partner had KQ (AK AQxx AJxx xxx for declarer) and signalling clubs could be necessary if partner had Axx or even AQ (AJx AQxx AJxx xx for declarer) Maybe it can be deduced that declarer can't have 18 count so partner either has Q♥ or A/K♠ and maybe Q♥ can be eliminated somehow. Still it's too complicated for me :P I wouldn't worry much about not getting it right.

4♠. I think it depends on how you play simple raise. I am used to playing sound raises. If it can be every 6hcp with 3♠ I think 3♦ is better. If I am not vul or playing MP's I also choose 3♦.

Assume your thinking time doesn't affect other players. What about bidding ? Would it improve by much ?

We play transfers after 1♦ precision opening in the following fashion: 1♦ - (1♥/1♠) - and now: -dbl = transfer to ♠ (4+) after 1♥ and 4♥ after 1♠ (or 5♥ if 7-11) -NT at any level is always natural -1♠ is transfer to 1NT or ♣ -jumps to 3 level below overcaller suit are natural and inviting -all other bids are transfers, if there is space they are weak/GF -transfer to opponent suit is ask for stopper For example: 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♠ = transfer to ♣ weak or GF (3♣ would be invite) 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♥ = transfer to 6+♠ weak or GF We play the same idea after polish 1♣, transfer are used after 1♦/1♥/1♠ overcalls. After 1NT overcall we play 2♣ majors, rest natural but I guess playing transfers here is good as well (we don't like losing ♦ suit) We got those ideas from Martens' ebook.

I open both. If I can't open them I double with both. I think passing 1NT at MP's is terrible.

1NT is not from the right side so I am happy to use it as artificial here. If I don't plan NFB and 1♦ is 11-22 I would be happy with lebensohl.