effervesce

The scheme I'd like to use (never played it, I'd like to convince my partner to play it given we already play symmetric relays in 1C) is 1M - 1NT forcing whatever - new suit/raise 2x/2NT = inv 1M - 2 new suit/3C = NF 1M-2C GF relay: 2D = min, no 4OM/any 5440 .....2S = 4+ clubs min .....2NT = 5440 type ............3D/3H/3S = H/M/L short ......3C = 5+ diamonds .............3H = high short .............3S = 6511/5611 major + diamonds .............3NT = 5521 low short .............4C = 5530 low short .............4D = 6520 low short .....3D = high short .....3H = 5242 .....3S = 5431 low short .....3NT = 6421 low short .....4C = 6430 low short .....4D = 7420 .....4H = 7411 2H = 4OM/singlesuited hearts with shortage .........2NT = singlesuited with shortage .................3H = HS .................3S = MS .................3NT = 6331 .................4C = 7(32)1 .................4D = 7330 ........3C = 5+/5+ majors ........3D+ = high short ........3H = 5422 ........3S = LS, 5431 ........etc 2S = 4+ clubs, max .........same scheme as above 2NT = singlesuited, no shortage .........3D = 6223 .........3H = 6232 .........3S = 6322 .........3NT = 7222 3C+ = 4+ diamonds, max, same scheme as above

3♠ is enough for me.

A bit off-topic but somewhat related - presumably you've already considered using 2C as a GF relay and 1NT as a forcing NT? I think it's better to have this arrangement than using 2C as any GI, given with invitational hands you want opener to bid naturally, while with a GF you don't mind artificial bids.

Yes, I wanted to bid 4♦ but it did seem an ambiguous bid. After 5♣ I should have bid 5♦. Yes, on the 2nd hand it seemed like a forcing pass situation - though perhaps if 3♥ sets up a forcing pass, opener (me) has a double of 5♠? Given no spade or diamond void 6 seems unlikely without responder having more. I doubled 6♠ as telling partner I know 7 is certainly not on. I think on the whole the first hand both me and partner could have done better; on the 2nd hand it's a bit unlucky in that we pushed them into a making slam - given just both our hands it looks like 6♠ is off one. 5♠X and 6♠X were very common contracts on the 2nd hand-the datum was NS +850.

Two similar hands from the Victor Championship Cup in Melbourne involving high level decisions: Hand 1: [hv=d=s&v=e&n=skqjt93hqdj98542c&w=s8hk987datcat7543&e=s5hat6543dkq7ckq6&s=sa7642hj2d63cj982]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The bidding: (p) - 2♣* - (2♠) - 3♥ (3♠) - 4♥ - (4♠) - 5♣ (p) - 5♥- (5♠) - p (p) X - all pass *Precision, 11-15, 6+ clubs may have 4+M Assign the blame for not bidding 6, and only getting 5♠X-1 for +100. Hand 2: [hv=d=s&v=e&n=skqjt93hqdj98542c&w=s8hk987datcat7543&e=s5hat6543dkq7ckq6&s=sa7642hj2d63cj982]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 2♣ - (2♠) - 3♥ - (4♠) 5♥ - (p) - p - (5♠) p - (p) - 6♥ - (6♠) X - all pass making 6♠X= for -1210. Again, assign the blame (if any).

Pass. Next.

The auction that gives you the most problems is 2♦ 2♠ 4♥ I think opener should strain to bid 4♥ here, in order to teach second hand not to pass with a good hand. Edit: you could alleviate this problem to some extent by agreeing that passing and then bidding 4♠ over 4♥ shows spades and a minor. If you are going to agree to pass over a Multi with a good hand, it's safest for this to be a hand with heart length. If LHO is short in hearts, the worst they can do to you is 2♦ 2♥ 2♠ They are only able to preempt you when LHO has length in both majors, when perhaps you won't mind not being able to show your hand. Edit: This can lead to other attractive sequences: 2♦ pass 2♥ pass 2♠ 3♣ shows 5♥ and 4+♣. I agree, but for a different reason-I had a similar hand after partner opened 1NT (mini) - 2♦ (multi-landy). I passed, and LHO passed! leaving them in 2♦ going -1. Passing with strong hands against a multi is very risky if LHO feels that passing might cause the auction to be passed out when we have game.

We play X as an opening or better hand with a 5+ card major. Partner responds as if we opened a multi. Whatever partner bids, I bid and rebid clubs.

1) Penalty 2) NF - you've already very tightly defined your hand in any case 3) Extras 4) Depends on the vul and the opponents. If they're vul and you're not I'd be more tempted to pass for penalties, hoping for at least 2 off. If they're non-vul and you are 3NT may score better. If the opponents are the type to just bid on anything, I pass for pen. If they're decent players, I'd bid 3NT.

You have described most of your hand. Since partner bid 4♠, it's partner's fault if slam is cold.

The new version seems to be right-justified rather than left to me. Anybody else see the same?

Ditto han. It's more useful to use 2NT as a shape ask, rather than showing a min or 18+.

Mark me up for 4NT, RKCB. I don't see how a 5♣ or 5♦ bid helps partner all that much.

4♥.

Playing a 6-9 or so criss-cross raise, this is a wtp 3♦ hand.

1♥ - the hand can play in 3 suits.

So, there is no manner to describe a maxi spade versus a mini spade suggestion? We play this in a strong club 2/1 setting.

After 2NT, we play 3♥ as 6x3x, 3♠ as 6313 and 3♦ as 5x4x. Partner's 3♥ after your 3♦ is then initially assumed to be a cue for diamonds, 3♠ looks like two top honors in spades, 4♣ is therefore a cue, 4♦ shows no club control, 4♥ a 2nd cue without a club cue, 4♠ an offer to play in 4♠ given no club control.

Care to try and put forth some constructive posts rather than making lame strawmen? I'm not 'clamoring' for a club lead. Anything could be right or wrong. I'm just trying to put forth an explanation why Han's double-dummy simulation suggests a club lead is best. Oh wait - it's 'absolutely clear' as put forth by Ron that a heart is right, and a club is wrong. What's wrong with a spade lead btw? if partner has K of spades, it could very well be the winning lead (partner will have the K of spades approximately 15-20% of the time?) If I thought that they're likely to be making unless we quickly set up some tricks, perhaps a spade is better than a heart. 1. You found some results (partner will have a heart honor x% of the time) and then jumped to some random conclusions (only lead a heart if they are making this contract y% of the time). You considered when a heart will blow a trick but not when a club will blow a trick or solve a guess, or when a heart is the most passive lead opposite no honors, or how you can have any idea what % of the time they are making, etc. 2. You claim partner will have at least one of A Q J of hearts 12+3=15% of the time, and now claim he will have the king of spades 15-20% of the time? I stand by 'fuzzy math'. I don't think it's "absolutely clear" a heart is right. Just that a club is really terrible. Yes, partner won't have the K of spades 15-20% of the time. More like 5% of the time. I pulled that 15-20% number out of thin air to see if you'd even think about my post. Glad to see that you did. I'm supposing that a club lead will blow a trick less often than a heart lead. A club lead will blow a trick if partner has Jxxx(x) or Qxx(x). A heart lead blows a trick if partner has nothing in hearts. Which one will occur more often?

I X.

Did the opponents have the option of 2♣ = heart support and spades? If they did, then partner won't be 2-2 in the majors.

Care to try and put forth some constructive posts rather than making lame strawmen? I'm not 'clamoring' for a club lead. Anything could be right or wrong. I'm just trying to put forth an explanation why Han's double-dummy simulation suggests a club lead is best. Oh wait - it's 'absolutely clear' as put forth by Ron that a heart is right, and a club is wrong. What's wrong with a spade lead btw? if partner has K of spades, it could very well be the winning lead (partner will have the K of spades approximately 15-20% of the time?) If I thought that they're likely to be making unless we quickly set up some tricks, perhaps a spade is better than a heart.

Are you sure you are comparing the right things? I am assuming your arithmetic is correct (too hard for me :( ), but sometimes (often?) the contract is cold. Of the times the contract can be beaten, perhaps we need partner to have the right card(s), either a heart card, or enough stoppers that he can get in and establish our hearts before declarer has 9 tricks. Yes, a heart lead is best if MOST of the time 3NT is cold, in which case yes, you do have to lead a heart. But if it's alot closer-ie 3NT is a close contract, then of course a passive lead is best. So it boils down to this: do you think they are in a contract that is pushy? Club lead. If it's very likely to make - then an aggressive lead is best.

That is assuming they have clubs to run. On hands where the clubs run, of course a club lead is poor. OTOH, what if they don't have that many clubs to run though? I'm not saying that a club is _the best_ lead, I'm just putting forth an argument why I'm leading one.

I'd play but unfortunately timezones would be a problem (6-midnight here in Sydney translates to 4am-12 noon for you) :(