vuroth

So how does partner invite game with 5♠? 2NT, allowing you to accept via 3♠ if you have 3 card support?

I've shown 12-14 and less than 4 spades. Partner thinks we might still have game, even though she's a passed hand. Partner also has at least 5 spades. Partner must be a near maximum pass, but for my money, that does not mean 12 points and 5 spades - that will often (always?) be opened. Ergo, either it's less points or more spades and a couple of less points (6+ spades, max 10 points?) We don't seem to have the firepower for 3NT, nor the fit for 4♠. I'll pass, and hope we can make.

1NT I'd also open AQJ QJx xx AJxxx as 1NT. If I was a jack lighter, then I'd bid 1♣ and say 1NT over any major suit response. 1NT = 15-17 balanced 1x, rebidding 1NT = 12-14 balanced Raising the major is a distortion, in my opinion. V

I've always played them as being right up against each other, but it's nice to hear someone else say this.

I live a simple life. If I'm using the same one as my partner is, I'm awfully happy....

If this is true, it makes a lot of sense to me....

I hate reading through a problem and not "seeing" anything. It must mean I'm missing something pretty basic. I can really only see 1 way to come to 9 tricks: 2 spades 2 hearts 1 diamond 4 clubs For this to work, I need teh K♥ in West, A♦ in west, and clubs 3-2 (or 4-1 with the 10 singleton) and hearts are 4-3. The immediate problem I see is tha tI only have one entry to my hand, ever (K♠). (The diamond holding looks like it might give better than 50% chance for 2 tricks, if I could lead up to it enough times. Unfortunately, I have entry problems. I also have tempo problems - opponents may be able to take 2 hearts, 2 diamonds and a club before I can establish 2 diamonds) So I play: Q♥ (1) K♣ (2) Q♣ (3) J♣, losing to the A Win return, likely A♥ (4) K♠ (5) ♣ (6) ♣ (7) ♦, losing to the A by W lose ♥ to W lose ♥ to W West must now lead ♦ to my K, or ♠ to my A.

Good problem. Obviously, I got it wrong. Interestingly, I suspect that my line is superior if you turn the diamond queen into a king. I also feel much more comfortable about the club line if opponents don't bid. V

6 losers in south's hand. I'll try to eliminate them as follows: 1 - diamond finesse 1 - on the club ace 3 - ruff. I'm quite confident that both opponents have at least 3 spades from the bidding, so I'll aim to ruff 3 spades on the board, throw a diamond on the ace of clubs, and try to use the diamond finesse as transportation (which I'm low on). If all goes well: spade ruff club ace, discard diamond diamond finesse spade ruff diamond to ace spade ruff I'm not quite home yet, as clubs may be 3-0. Cash the high trump on the board. If both follow, ruff a club high, high trump and claim 6. If LHO shows out, club to hand, ruffing high enough to win and claim. If RHO shows out, club to low ruff, hope it wins. I prefer this to establishing clubs, because 1) I don't trust clubs to break nicely, and 2) my ruffing spots in hand are poor Still, I'm just below 50%, so maybe there's something better out there. (I am unlikely to survive failing the diamond finesse, as a return in either red suit is bad.) V

Yup. Happens to my partner's partners all the time. :)

What's the range on the 2♣ bid? Would you really jump to 3♣ with 17, knowing partner might only have 6?

North reversed 1♦ and pass? :) I wouldn't dream of opening North's hand, but my style tends to be rather (overbearingly) sound. I would have passed the double, trying to limit my hand. I don't really see how it can be a desire to defend, but maybe I'm wrong. Even if you think that 4♦ is natural and possibly to play (and I don't, I think it's a control bid), I can't imagine why you'd rather play there than in game. If you're already at the 4 level.... I don't know whether south would have been better off bidding 4!C immediately, or doing it the way it was done. Certainly, the double fit and the short clubs are worth knowing about. 0.02 V

That is just bizarre. Why have special rules for balanced hands at different levels of strength? Why not just handle every 12-14 balanced the same way, and every 15-17 balanced the same way, etc?

Instructive. I find myself really pondering whether 2♣ is the right rebid for South, and how the partnership can deduce they're sitting on 26 points. It seems like a tough proposition. If south opens 1NT, suddenly the whole thing seems so much easier!

I have pretty much the worst hand I could have for my bidding, and no fit with partner. Also, I can't pass. 2NT seems clear to me. I'm not an authority, though. And yes, I agree with 1♠

What is it about hand 2 that leads us to preferring a moysian over a NT bid? Is it the possibility that partner will have 5♥? The fact that we might bid 1NT with a singleton ♥? The short clubs which might give a ruff? The concentration of values in ♥? I don't object to the bid, but I'm a bit surprised it's a consensus. I'd like to better understand the criteria in order to sharpen my own decision making. V

I'm not sure what RHO's correct bid is, but I'm at least sympathetic to Pass. 2♠ was not good news for him. He now knows that partner is pretty much empty in ♦s. With no sure fit an possible as few as 18 points outside of diamonds betwen the pair, bidding any higher might not be all that safe. Partner rates to have a ton of black cards. It's not impossible that our hand would only take 1 trick in a ♠ contract. Yes, partner has a huge hand. From the bidding, it looks like the hands are a big misfit. 0.02. If I'm way off base, hopefully someone can explain it to me.... V

Still, it's a good example hand.

You're right, jillybean. The question is - does the stayman sequence still require a 4cM? I would have thought that it did, but maybe I'm wrong.... I would guess that the advantage of 4-way transfers is that you can transfer with a weak OR strong hand, just like jacoby transfers. V

In SAYC, 3♣ is invitational to 3NT. (Don't even ask what 4♣ is in SAYC....) If you're playing SAYC, I think you might be constrained to bidding 5♣ on this one - I don't see any other way to force game in a minor. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong....

Write-in vote for the Supertramp album.

And who's font of knowledge does this pearl reflect? I think my sig makes it clear that my opinion should not be regarded as expert.

Less exciting??? You should see some of my basic system mistakes! :D

The way I drew up my squeeze looks wrong in retrospect. Not sure what the right way to play is.

This is B/I, not ego deathmatch. (If you want beginners to be brave enough to post, be wrong and learn, please keep the sarcasm and opinion bashing to the other forums.) xx ATxx Kxxx AQT, over 1♦... 1♥ promises 5+ hearts 1NT promises more points 2♣ promises 5+ clubs 2♦ promises 5+ diamonds Double promises better spades Balancing exists for precisely this kind of situation - partner has no reasonable bid or is trapping, but your side may still be able to make game, or at least a better contract. Clearly, you and partner need to be on the same page. If partner routinely overcalls with short suits, then maybe you don't need to know about balacing at all. If your partner doesn't know you're "borrowing a king", don't. But my understaning has always been that balancing is standard and beneficial. V