vuroth

if that were the case, LHO with ♠QJxx(x) and ♣KQ, then RHO has pretty much every other high card (no takeout X despite 41xx, 8+ point). With LHO guarding ♠/♣ and RHO guarding ♣/♦, I have the Q♦ and J♣ in 2 - so it almost looks like a squeeze. I really can't fathom it, though, if it's there. (Maybe concede a diamond, throwing a spade on it?) I also can't figure out how I'd be able to tell before adopting the other line. if I go low to the 8, and LHO wins with the 9 while RHO shows out, it's too late, I think.

Wow, the economic downturn has really hurt the rule of 20! :P :) :)

I remember when I was young seeing a family member get a 28 point hand. I was super impressed, because according to Scheinwold, it was too strong to open 3NT! Last Friday, I'm playing rubber bridge with family partnered with the same family member of the famous 28 point hand, when said family member opens: "oh ****" ♠AKQJ ♥AKQJ7 ♦K6 ♣AK 30 HCP. 6♥ was duly made. Dummy (me) had ♥Txx which was all that was needed on the A♦ lead (trumps split 3-2, not that it mattered)

Not an authority, but my 2 options are 3♣ and pass. If 3♣ seems too risky, just pass, I think.

Quickly before dinner: 1. ruffing finesse in diamonds should provide a place to throw a spade or two. 2, 3 - something like eliminate minors, A♠, low to the 8? If spades are 3-2 I'm fine, if they're 4-1 I can make LHO lead to my spade holding OR give me a spade discard.

I like 2NT/3♠, but doesn't 4♥ over 4♣ deny a ♦ stop?

That leaves partner with xx Qxxx Kxx Jxxx, and he's bidding stayman over our 1NT overcall. Does this seem right?

If declarer is 7321 or 7312, it doesn't matter what diamond you lead. The important point is that your side win the THIRD round of diamonds, after which declarer can't get back to dummy.

Partner has 8+ right? Which would mean that declarer has 8-, right? Ok, this is something I'm not very good at, but what hands exactly make sense for declarer to have? Declarer is vulnerable, and has stuck his foot in at the 3 level, with 8- points. I can only think of two: QJxxxxx Axx x(x) x(x) KQxxxxx xxx Kx x I realize it's moot now, but if partner was single in clubs, then declarer had: HHxxxxx Hx v xxxx HHxxxxx v Hx xxxx or something similar So I really think that declarer has one of the A♥ or K♦. If declarer has the K♦, a ♥ is right. If declarer has the A♥, a ♦ is probably better, but if I play a ♥, I think the Q♥ is better. So I'll lead the Q♥ V PS - maybe if I post enough different answers sooner or later I'll get it right. :lol: :D

Declarer has at most 2 ♦s. Let's cut off his entries to dummy. EDIT: If declarer is 7303, then he's not going to be running diamonds, so I'm less worried. I think the worrisome holding is 7321, soemthing like KQxxxxx xxx Kx x. In this case, He's going to be looking to throw hearts on the diamonds. For this holding, forcing diamonds early doesn't really help. I think for that holding, I need to switch to hearts now. V

3♥ wtp? Maybe the problem is that parnter owes me a beer? :)

Let this be a lesson for the reader - pay attention to the opening lead!!

Doesn't 5♦ make? Doesn't partner pull 3NT?

The only thing that I maybe didn't consider is partner not leading my suit. Obviously, declarer is very distributional. Maybe he's got a 7 or 8 card ♠ suit. Of course, there's nothing I can do about that. Maybe he's 55, or something close to that. He doesn't have 5♣, or partner's leading one. He could have 5♦, but lacking the AK I'm not sure that warrants a 4♠ bid after I bid them. (Sure his partner only has 1 or 2 likely, but they're 1 or 2 LOSERS) 5♥ actually seems the most sensible, in which case A♥, low ♥ is right. Ok, partner not leading a ♦ is bothering me. If partner is void, though, partner has at least 2 trump, so really, trying the ♥ first can't cost. EDIT - sorry, unless declarer has 8050, in which case, hats off to him.

I dealt and opened 4♦, partner raised to 5♦. Opponents were silent.

Yup. Won the A♣, clicked on a small ♣ on the board and thought to myself "wait, I bet a ♠ was 1% better. oh well, it won't matter" It mattered. Q♦ was doubleton, and we were the only pair in 5♦. :(

Iran is run by a bit of a theocratic nutcase, but he also seems to be genuinely interested in developing Iran into a local power. NK is run by a theocratic nutcase, who wouldn't give a damn if economic sanctions ran his country into the ground. The average Iranian is far, far better off than the average North Korean. V

Oh heck! Now I see what I missed at the table. I'm never losing 2 club tricks. ARGH. V

Or is it a wash? Hidden: P 1D 2C 2S P 2NT P 3S P 4S P P P [hv=d=w&v=n&n=sj4hj843daqt54caq&s=sakt953hqt9d7ct43]133|200|Scoring: MP J♣ led[/hv]

I actually had problems with an auction like this last night, because I have no idea how strong partner can be for either bid. If partner has AK♦ and a black K I have great play for 3NT. I only have 1 stopper and 1 holdup in ♣, though, so if partner's points are more in the majors... Well, partner should be at least 10 points, I *think*. 3NT seems plausible, though not certain, so I think I'd try it.

I don't see much. Partner can't have much more in HCP than the QJ♥. A♥ and low heart back doesn't look like it can cost. Declarer isn't likely to have the singleton K♥, but I guess it's something. V

Thanks. That makes a ton of sense. V

Right after I chose my line last night, I saw an alternative line that I thought was a tiny bit better. Maybe there's a better line still, not sure. Nonetheless, I thought I would share. Opponents silent, playing 5♦ [hv=d=s&v=e&n=sat64hqj9dcaqt873&s=s7ht54dakj97653c4]133|200|Scoring: MP 5♣ led.[/hv]

1♥ 1♠ 1NT 2♣ 2NT 3♠ ? I've already shown 2 spades, haven't I? Does that mean this is non-forcing, just an improved contract over 2NT? Also, was my bidding correct with: ♠62 ♥QJ754 ♦AKQ ♣Q32 ?

I *think* not, but can't recall for sure.