CSGibson

yeah. 3♥ too. Or, more specifically, they are raises with values/shape and a desire for a heart lead should we be defending.

I don't think 4♥ has a standard meaning, and I would never bid it in this auction without an agreement as to what it was. My default agreement is that it is a fit jump, but I have also played splinter. I have never played it as "to play", but I don't think its ridiculous, just not my own personal preference.

[hv=pc=n&s=skj6haq4dt72ck976&n=saqt53h6daqcat842&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c(Strong%2C%20forcing%2C%20artificial)p2s(13+%20HCP%2C%20no%205%20card%20suit)p3sp4c(club%20control%2C%20good%20hand%20for%20spades)p4dp4hp4np5hp5np6cp6sppp]266|200[/hv] We wrong-sided a precision contract, but it led to an interesting play problem in 6 spades. ♣Q is led. Matchpoints. Trump are 3-2. How do you play?

Update: I failed in the goal to make it to the final day of all of the national pairs/swiss events that I entered in Dallas (twice), but I did get a 10th place finish in the Jacoby swiss with JeffFord76, another BBO poster, as a partner. The rest of the goals are in progress/yet to be decided.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa974hj742dca7542&n=skqjt5hk6daj4ckq9&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1c(16+)1d1s(5+%20clubs%2C%205+%20HCP)3d3s4d5dp6cp6sppp&p=s6skd7s4d4dts9d2s7s3sjd5djdqsad3c2c8ckc3sqd6h2s2sth5h4s8]399|300[/hv] Plan the play from here. Also, if you object to the play of the hand so far, or the bidding (precision, transfer based), feel free to comment on that as well. East shows up with the K of diamonds if you cash the ace at any point.

My 5 club call doesn't have shortness in their suit and length in every other suit. It's not like I think 5 clubs is horrible - we all know the scenerios where it may work out better - but its awfully committal to our best spot when I have tolerance for lots of other spots. Partner may even have slam aspirations if he knows we have support for his suit/shortage in hearts. The vulnerability also gives X a boost - in your worst case scenario where 4SX makes an overtrick or two because partner passes with his yarb, they may also be setting 5 clubs X for 8 or 1100, or making slam in hearts.

Double, assuming that its take-out oriented.

FYP

Not quick enough.

So it sounds like majority opinion that I can ask the partner of the opening leader after the lead is faced against a slam how frequently they lead away from kings against suit slams, for example, or whether their partner would tend to lead conservatively or aggressively in their partnership experience in that situation? Can anyone show me a single case where that has ever been contested successfully? Or has anyone ever heard of a single case where the director made them disclose that information?

It is whatever you agree it is. I have frequently heard of pairs who treat 1S-P-2S like it were pass-pass-2S, with lebensohl and leaping michaels as conventional agreements. It makes some sense to me - preempts lose their effectiveness when one side has tightly defined their hand, as RHO did with 2S, so alternative methods do have some appeal...though losing the ability to suggest a save with a non-constructive hand, or having to lump non-constructive and constructive hands into 3 level bids might be too big of a trade-off.

No warnings to opponents are necessary. You should not be disclosing anything but what your leads mean systemically - you certainly don't have to disclose lead tendancies in my opinion.

Its hard to tell sometimes when you don't use the quote. And, of course, what the hell is a kit (rhetorical, I don't care, but obviously not a term that's universal).

Ed, I think you are confusing the issue with your attempt to be helpful. What you are writing about is in no version of lebensohl I am familiar with, and probably does not address in any way the OP's problem. to the OP: playing standard lebensohl, double does not need to be alerted. Responder's 2N and 3 level suit bids after X need to be alerted, with the possible exception of the cue-bid (I'm not sure, but they are rarely alerted). Alerting rule of thumb: Bids should only be alerted if they convey unusual information. X does not mean anything different whether you are playing lebensohl or not; only responder's calls have different meanings because of the convention, and only responder's calls need to be alerted unless you are using other conventional treatments in conjunction with lebensohl, like Dave's equal level conversion example.

You are right, I posted a semi-plausible auction that allows you to stop, but in real life I'm driving to slam when partner opens 1H and they preempt my void in the circumstance that I have 9 indestructible tricks. Actually, a more likely auction would be 1H-(3C)-5C (exclusion?) or something like that, signing off in 6♠ opposite a 1 response. Although this is not a completely horrible slam on a likely club lead - all we need is the J of hearts onside...(planning to ruff, draw trump, float ♥Q whether covered or not).

I disagree. I think it asks for a general evaluation of hand for slam suitability - we weren't cue-bidding, except for 4♣ which I think establishes a club control when followed by 5♠ (differentiating between that and 5♠ immediately)

No matter what the colors, I'd expect N to convert for penalty.

This is one of those hands where I think it will be more important to start describing your hand and hope you can make game opposite a 1♠ opening than it would be to try and sort out both strain and level with a 1N response, so I would respond 2♥, natural and game forcing, opposite 1♠, and keep rebidding diamonds until opener eventually gives preference to hearts - we would be in 4♥. My exact auction would probably be 1♠-2♥; 2♠-3♦; 3N-4♦; 4♥.

S 4♠, all pass. Edit… Whoops, misread the auction. I might be more inclined to the following; 1♥-(3C)-3♠; 3N-4♣; 4♥-5♠ all pass.

I could be wrong, but I think the only chance the defense had for a legitimate set, barring declarer error, is to start with a low spade, and make declarer guess the position. Then we may get two hearts, a spade, a club, and two diamonds.

In a natural context, I like an intermediate 2 bid - about 9-14 HCP, 6+ diamonds. It allows you to handle the bridge world hand of death (1D-1M-2D is now 15-18, 1D-1M-3D forcing to game and natural), and is a little more frequent than a weak 2 in diamonds. In fact, I like intermediate 2 bids for all 2M bids, though I don't play them in any partnership except my precision partnership, where I play an intermediate 2D only (9-12), which can have a 4 or 5 card major on the side.

trophies in our area are handled in the following way: Winning a trophy entitles you to have your name engraved on it. Trophies are kept at the club, and there is never anything taken home by the winners. I like the method. I get to look at the history of the event when I visit a club, and if I win a trophy, I'd rather not have it in my home/be responsible for tracking it down the next year.

So I tend to get headaches after bridge, but not after any other activity in my life, and I know that I have had partners who are the same way. Is this a unique problem, or is it fairly common?

I've thought about it. It certainly clarifies some situations, but in others - like the extreme 2-suiter - I may be missing 3 kings and really need to know about one specific one. I'm not saying its bad, but there are potential trade-offs which I may not be willing to deal with in these situations where the most important thing is to play the same thing as your partner/have good and solid agreements rather than the best theoretical agreements.

I've found the advantages of bidding where you have values in constructive bidding to be fairly pronounced - I've actually tried both, and was unable to make "bid what you need" work for me. The bid holes theory works similarly for finding 3N, but your partner doesn't know whether the hole is 3 small, 1 small, or what. Bidding what you have implies some length in the suit, and helps partner evaluate a fit in either a suit or NT contract. Now, that being said, I'm not really a system wonk, so its possible that there is a way-too-complicated solution that I just wasn't up for working out, but a lot of these general rules are meant, for me, to simplify bidding situations, so any additional mechanism tacked on to them are definitely significant negatives in my mind.