CSGibson

These were the full hands and the auction we had. [hv=d=s&v=b&n=st6h752dkq93c8743&s=skj974hkdatcakt92]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1♠ 1N 3♣ 3♦ 3♥ 3N[/hv] Partner had a misunderstanding about what I intended 3♥ to be, but all was well because the person on lead underled their ace of hearts, and partner brought clubs home for 5 tricks.

No. Then why ask??? I would also bid 3H btw. I do want input on jump shifting, as I thought it was close either way. I also wanted input on what I should do next after having jump shifted, so I was hoping that those that disagreed would put aside their disagreement to comment. If that was not clear, then hopefully this addendum will help clarify the intent of the post.

ok, just checking. 1♦ was, of course, passed out, and at the other table 4 spades made after a 2NT opener, which received a transfer into spades, superaccepted. Partner has a 1 count with 5 spades to the 9 and a stiff diamond.

Both were conservative, but I think N should find a 3 heart call. 2 hearts in this auction can occur on 5 hearts with a 2-5-3-3 minimum, among other hands, so South's inaction is at least understandable if unduly pessimistic.

My feelings can best be summed up by clickable smiles. X :D 4♥ :mellow:

strong 5-6. GF if you have any sort of fit with either suit.

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sakq8ha3dakt72c84]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Playing 2/1 with puppet stayman available.

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=skj974hkdatcakt92]133|100|Scoring: IMP Uncontested Auction 1♠ 1N* 3♣ 3♦ *Forcing[/hv] Agree with the JS? Now I don't care if you agree with the jump shift. You've taken the hand over for me, who made the bid. What is your bid now?

I'm a big believer in suction, especially if played with a person who really knows it well. Over NT I play a modified suction. X - 3-4 suited 16 + 2♣ - shows ♦ OR ♥&♠ OR ♠&♦ 2♦ - shows ♥ OR ♠&♣ 2♥ - shows ♠ OR ♣&♦ 2♠ - shows ♣ OR ♦&♥ 2N - shows ♣&♥ The obvious strengths of suction are that you can show all one and two suited hands at a reasonable level without giving up a penalty double. The big disadvantage is that if your opponents have a clear agreement about how to defend suction, they can describe more hand types and have more accurate auctions. Oh, and it's a mid-chart convention, so it's not allowed in all ACBL districts/events. In the Portland, Oregon area, where suction is deemed acceptable for all levels of all events by the powers that be in the district, it seems to be the defense of choice for most of the top flight A pairs.

Really? You don't like "changing your system" just because you now have more flexibility to show a variety of hands? Why not? Are you keeping X for penalty or something? Is this some sort of dry humor that I'm not getting? I imagine he uses X to show hands which he now can't bid because of the intervention. So not strong hands with ♦ and/or 4 card ♣ support and no ♥ stopper. EricK is close, and there is certainly no "dry humour". 1C (1H) X shows hands with both minors and the unbiddable hands as EricK suggests, no H stop. We, as do many, open 1C with possibly 2 cards in that suit as 1D guarantees 4. Personally I think it is YOU who is giving up flexibility CS, by making the, in my view, dubious and unnecessary distinction between 4 and 5 cards in S. (What would you call after (1H) with Qxx xx AQxx xxxx say? 1NT? Wonderful bid with no stopper. Pass? 2C? That is pretty horrible). However we have been down this road before in discussions on this board and I realise many/most US players prefer to be able to show 4 or 5 cards in S). It shouldn't surprise you though that many others don't feel the need to make this distinction. ok, that is a reasonable treatment. Sorry I was over the top, thank you for explaining further.

your pass meant you were willing to play 3 diamonds doubled. Partner's pass says that he is also willing to play 3 diamonds doubled. A deeper issue: given that the person making the "lead director" is on lead, they probably have a broken suit that they are not planning on leading. I wouldn't be bothered by it, and would just bid 3NT, assuming you are not playing puppet.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sxxhqxxxxdqjt8xcx]133|100|Scoring: IMP Bidding goes: 1♣ (1♠) P P 1N (2♠) to you.[/hv] Ops are experienced tournament players. Do you make a bid, or are you a passer?

Really? You don't like "changing your system" just because you now have more flexibility to show a variety of hands? Why not? Are you keeping X for penalty or something? Is this some sort of dry humor that I'm not getting?

I would win in hand, cash the ace of hearts, ruff a low heart, lead a trump to the king. If that holds, I'm ruffing another heart high and playing another trump. That line works whenever hearts break no worse than 5-3 and trump no worse than 3-1, plus some other variations where hearts are 6-2 but the short opponent doesn't have the T of diamonds. Edit: Oops, I'm an idiot. Ignore me.

Yeah against players good enough to pass their strong NT's when I've bid out of turn (hoping to double me in my guessed and overbid contract), I might have to start psyching in 3rd seat before RHO bids. That'll mix things up a bit I'm sure - kinda of like psyching in 3rd seat after P-P, but more fun since it confuses 2nd seat who was thinking about bidding... I'm 99% sure that it's a procedural penalty to start bidding out of turn on purpose to rig the auction.

I'm much better at criticizing partner in F2F because they can't look at the hand diagram and know that I'm talking nonsense; they have to remember it on their own if they want to refute me.

That line fails if RHO has 5224 pattern. On the second diamond ruff, he ditches a heart. You can discount 5-2-2-4 pattern depending on what is played to the diamond ace and ruff by RHO. If they discard the Q T of diamonds, that is the only case where I'm worried about that pattern type. If LHO had an honor sequence, I'm sure that would have been led, or that he would have picked a safer lead. Otherwise, the normal trump coup play looks sound without worrying about the extingencies of a doubleton diamond with RHO.

The fact that her partner was considering bidding at all is also UI! So we obviously have to look at the lead problem of her hand with no UI at all. Is the diamond Jack suggested by the UI? Well isn't that for the TD and/or appeals committee to decide? I would say that if the LHO led a diamond because of partner's questions, then she took the wrong bit of information into account. What she should evaluate is not whether partner was asking about diamonds, but whether partner made a lead directing double of diamonds. What I'm getting at is that RHO should be able to ask his questions in peace because he has a natural mechanism to get a diamond lead if he wants it - the red card.

Are you allowed to play Mid-Chart conventions? If so, I'd play a modified suction: X = penalty 2♣ = ♦ or ♥ & ♠ or ♠ & ♦ 2♦ = ♥ or ♠ & ♣ 2♥ = ♠ or ♣ & ♦ 2♠ = ♣ or ♦ & ♥ 2N = ♣ & ♥ responses are pass or correct at all levels (For example, over a 2♦ bid, if you had good hearts and better spades than clubs, you'd respond an appropriate number of spades, like playing multi), 3 of suit bid is limit raise or better for every combination NT response is a relay to clubs, says that you don't care what they have, you know where you want to play.

Doesn't a singleton look like a natural lead? What, you mean it's no trump and partner had an opportunity to make a lead directing double of diamonds, but failed to do so? Whoops.

I'd say 6 hearts to invite a grand, but there's no way partner's accepting with no aces. What the heck, 7 spades. It's a 34 point deck (assuming the opps have the KQJ of diamonds among their 11-12 diamonds), and it's hard to imagine a GF bid from partner that does not have the KQ of spades and K of clubs.

For those of you who play Kokish and short suit game tries, what advantages do you find in the system? Any disadvantages?

Yes.

I did not bid on, but considered it for a long time before passing for the reasons explained by the other posters. Full NS hand: [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sakqj7hj983d97ca6&s=shaqtdak8532cq843]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv]