effervesce

1) 2NT 2) 2♣

Perhaps it was an artefact of the single(double?)-dummy simulation engine GIB uses when working out what to bid? Perhaps it simulated (x hands) for the 1NT opener with a 2♠ rebid, and found that a club splinter (pretending to have 0-1 clubs) reached the best spot opposite the 1NT opener. I could be wrong as how GIB decides what to bid though...

♥. Partner is (very slightly) more likely to hold a Q of the suit you lead than a K.

Sorry you're right - you still have to pick the clubs.

I'd find it hard to believe RHO would play small on the lead of a heart from QJxx, QJx, Qxx or Qx, thus it looks like hearts are either 3-3 or splitting 4-2 with RHO having Jx. I'll play off the top hearts, if they're 3-3 I'm home - hopefully LHO has QTxx if they're 4-2 though. If indeed they are 4-2 with LHO having 4, play another heart, putting LHO on lead. LHO cannot attack clubs effectively, and if he also has the A diamonds I'll likely make. If RHO has 4, I'll have to hope for something good in clubs, such as LHO having Jxx where the play of the Q blocks the suit, and hope the K of diamonds is onside. Also, why are people playing on diamonds? It looks like playing on diamonds has a 25% chance of getting 3 diamond tricks if you lead small from dummy. AJ2 Q8 K QJ2 A8 x AQJ2 8 - AQJ 82 - AJ Q82 x QJ A82 K J AQ82 - J2 AQ8 - 25% of the time, leading K for smother works, 25% of the time a small x...

Q♠, small heart to the 9.

1♠. Would do so even at IMPs if fav vul.

On a related note, today (about 30 mins ago actually) I had [hv=d=e&v=e&s=s97hat3dk54cajt72]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The bidding was 1♠, two passes to you. What do you do?

Dummy reversal. A club loser goes on the long diamond.

A second seat preempt should at least be partly constructive...

After partner opens 1♦ catchall 0+, bidding 1M on a 13(45) type pattern without enough to respond at the 2 level 1S-2C-2X-3S in standard as well for a limit 3 card raise on a 3-4-3-3 shape After a 1♣ opening bidding 1♦ on a 3-3-3-4 shape, wanting partner to bid 1NT A tactical psyche in the auction 1m (X) - 1M

You may have just offered proof of when a 20% game bid makes sense. Heck, in that example if they're always going to make 4m, and not double you when in game it makes sense to be there on a 0% game.

Alot of pairs also play pass = no preference, in which case RHO will bid their better minor. In any case, partner can ask what the pass means. If pass = to play in XX, partner can bid spades with spade support. Otherwise partner rates to have a heart stack.

3♣ for me. Partner will expect more for a 1♣ then 2♣ rebid. Also shuts out the opponents. May go -1, but hey that's life. [EDIT] sorry didnt see it was in first seat fav vul. 1♣ then 2♣ as p will not expect so much from a fav vul 3♣.

1) XX - yes it may be quite swingy - I doubt RHO will pass this out. 2) X and 3NT are both reasonable. 3) Whatever your checkback/NMF bid is. Even without checkback/NMF, 2♣ is the normal bid...

From a back-of-the-envelope calculation (performed purely from spaces probability using pen, paper and calculator) partner rates to have on average around 3.824 spades 2.294 hearts 3.824 diamonds 3.059 clubs (this was done without restricting partner to a maximum of 4 spades or restricting partner to not having a takeout double, both of which rate to reduce the number of spades partner has - similarly this should increase partner's number of hearts. Ie, this calculation is should reproduce the average of the remaining cards randomly distributed to the 3 players in a monte-carlo simulation). The actual figures run from a simulation taking into account hands without a takeout X or 1♠ overcall I'd imagine would be roughly 3.25 spades 3 hearts 3.75 diamonds 3 clubs Thus it appears to me that the main benefit of X'ing is being able to play in 1NT. The main disadvantage is playing in diamonds in a 7 card fit when you have a 8 card club fit. Or playing in NT when clubs are better. Let us work out the actual probabilities of the number of clubs partner has. There are 34 remaining unknown cards, as you know 13 from your own hand and 5 from the 1♥ bidder. Thus, the sample space is 34C13 for the number of hands partner can hold, or 927983760. The number of hands where he has 0 clubs is 8C0*34C26 = 18156204. Thus p(0 clubs) = 0.02 Similarly p(1 club) = 0.08 p(2 clubs) = 0.23 p(3 clubs) = 0.32 p(4 clubs) = 0.24 p(5 clubs) = 0.09 p(3 or more clubs) = 0.66 Thus you have a 66% chance of having at least an 8 card fit in clubs.

Sure- but if you do belong in diamonds, isn't it likely partner will bid 2♦ with 5 of them and a singleton club, and quite often with a doubleton club?

8♥.

Huh? playing 4/3 major suit fits is like the bomb at matchpoints. Also partner can respond one level lower. 2♣ is too committal on such a wretched suit (imo). The hand was given for IMPs. 1 level higher for 1-2 more trumps is more than worth it. If partner has a singleton club, or if he wanted to bid 1NT, so much for your having 1 or 2 more trumps... Heck, while we're at it why dont we include hands where partner responds 1♠ to your double on a 3-4-3-3 without a heart stopper or 2♦ on 3-3-4-3... You can't have everything - some bids gain on some hands and others on others. IMO on the balance 2♣ should work better. Also, it puts more pressure on LHO - if he/she is going to bid, they may have to bid now or forever hold their peace. After a X, they can await developments. I think the best way to conclude this is to run a monte-carlo simulation - how many cards of each suit is partner most likely to have, given the constraints of 0-4 spades?

Huh? playing 4/3 major suit fits is like the bomb at matchpoints. Also partner can respond one level lower. 2♣ is too committal on such a wretched suit (imo). The hand was given for IMPs. 1 level higher for 1-2 more trumps is more than worth it.

Pass. 1st alternative: 1♠.

Why all these votes for double? Aren't partner's chances for having 5 spades practically nil given no 1♠overcall?? I'll take the 8+ card fit over a 7 card fit anyday thankyou very much.... As for partner's bid to 3NT - if he/she followed the rule of subtracting 3 points when responding to a balancing bid, 2NT was the right bid (though 3NT is reasonable given the upgrading of the heart honors).

pass.

Lead directing primarily, usually extra shape.

2♣, X and pass all seem reasonable. In passout seat, add 3 points to your hand. If you would bid then, then bid, otherwise pass. Thus, when partner responds to your balancing bid, he'll take that into account and subtract 3 when responding.