andy_h

1) Pass. -140 may not be good but it's likely going to be reached across the field so why am I trying for a top/bottom? As an added note, the opponents have competed on a 4-4 fit so that leaves partner with a most likely shape of 3424 or 3415 or 3433. The former 2 doesn't exactly help our defence given we have 9+ clubs between us and either opponent could be short in a round suit. 2) 4♠. Bid them suits and it's MP's. 3) 3♦.

Why didn't I bid 2♠ over 2♥?

Really hate our pass over 1♠. Game could easily be on opposite an opening hand, so I would bid 1NT which is the lesser of evils than everything else. I wonder, if I had passed (and partner trusts that I would bid with this type of hand) and the auction proceeds as suggested, does bidding 3♦ say to partner that you forgot to bid on the previous round? Has anyone ever catered to that? Anyway, if I had passed I would now bid 4♠.

X, for flexibility.

Diamond and pass.

3rd seat unfavourable with these lousy spots? I open light in 3rd seat too so 1♠ is utterly normal for me.

Agree with 4♠. 4♥ could easily make with their heart honours onside and diamonds dropping so letting LHO guess to bid at the 5 level or not seems like good prospects.

I would definitely double - many many good things can happen. And at the very least, I can always rebid 2NT which shows exactly my hand. A direct 2NT doesn't do justice with 4 bullets and a king, even though we are 4333. A 15-19.5 2NT is just too wide ranging.

Agree with 655321. 1♥ opening is standout in any seat.

North has a normal 2NT bid.

Assuming X of 2♦ would have been support double, then I would bid 3♦ as responder (assuming 3♣ by responder is not GF) because I have a fit for opener and a really good hand. That way it allows opener to bid 3♥ with 4216 having denied 3 hearts already. On the above auction, I would definitely bid 3♠ showing 6-5 because we could easily have a 5-3 spade fit. Wait, what kind of strength did 3♥ show? Do you play weak jump shifts? If not then I'd prefer passing 3♥. If 3♥ showed strength then I would want to search for a 5-3 spade fit and if that's lacking partner can still try 3NT at his last go. I think 4♥ is the worst bid in the auction. East had more of a slam try in clubs and I don't understand why he still wants to insist on hearts when partner has shown 5-6 in the blacks AND has heart us announce 6 card hearts.

At favourable I'd be tempted with 4♠ but since we're w/w I'll go with 3. Really dislike pass when I can get my good suit in on the first go and let the opponents guess at the 4 level.

They should both be for rescue imo. On the first one opener could easily have 4333 or 4432 or 4324 and may think bidding on may risk the partnership in more danger and passes. When this is passed for penalties then responder can use his judgement. What I have learnt throughout the years is that when the opponents penalty passes against you at the ONE level, they are seriously not joking. So that gives the responder all the more reason to escape with a suitable hand. On the 2nd one, opener is most likely to be 4432 and wants to run.

What's the 13th card? And well done =)

West should have bid 4♠ after hearing partner making a Michaels cue-bid. With such a good fit and a decent hand and not knowing if partner's Michaels bid was weak or not you'll be either bidding to make or sacrifice) What your partner mentioned about not needing to be 5-5 to michaels, imo, is a very bad idea. Some 5m4S hands are suitable for a X or a 2m overcall so I prefer not to have those type of hands in my Michaels bid. And plus, by having it as 5-5 you can be sure to bid up to the limit (like 4♠) here with a 9+ fit and that can be very useful sometimes in terms of preemptive measures. So I guess that is why your partner 'only' bid 2♠ because he thought the partnership may only have a total of 8spades. But even still he could have found some way to invite.

The opponents appear to have 10+ hearts, or partner doesn't have much strength. If the latter it doesn't seem we have a fit anywhere and if the former, partner can be 4-3-x-x or 3-2-x-x etc. I don't think 2♦ is that bad but if the opponents do indeed have 10 hearts between them I'm not even sure if I can defeat 4♥ nor do I know if we'll have a good sac if partner is 3-2-x-x or a bad one if 4-3-x-x. I'm going to pass and defend.

As a side note, it would've been a bit more interesting had you given the auction without the double. I would need a tad better spades to respond 1♠ than 1NT. However interchange my round suits and I would bid 1♠.

O rly?

Answer to our RHO? If you really did see the auction properly, how is 3NT ever going to be a good contract when you only have 1 stopper with running-less diamonds?

I bid my systemic way of showing diamonds! After this start (yes I hateee the initial pass) this seems like a non-problem. I can't even bid 3♦ now given that it is fit showing for me, so I have to unbearably watch the opponents bid out as they have free bidding space. I don't consider 7xxx worthy of mentioning given my rock solid diamonds.

In some partnerhips your suggested sequence would show that you bid around heart shortness with a hand too strong to splinter (kjxx x kxx akxxx). You will end up in six spades on your actual hand, which might make, or 7 spades, which might not. If you read my 2nd paragraph, I mentioned the fact that if I had spade support I would have bid it immediately the round before. In whoever's partnership that thinks to bid 2♣, 3♦, THEN 4♠ with KJxx x Kxx AKxxx (4 card support!!!) I would consider insane. Even if you change the spades and diamonds I don't understand why on earth you would not show spade support. If that is your/someone else's 'systemic' way of showing your suggested 4135 or 3145 hands, then I don't understand the need to play 2/1 as opposed to SAYC.

Yes, that is one of the problems in a 2/1 auction especially when they are 16 opposite 16 or alike without a fit. However on this hand, I'm not particularly interested in inviting in NT because we have found a club fit. Partner doesn't even need that good of a hand (your example one) like AQxxx Ax xx Qxxx and if clubs and spades behave then 6♣ is good. On your auction I would bid 4♠ over 3NT most likely suggesting HH in spades and an invite to slam. That way partner can judge whether to play in 4♠ on a 5-2 fit, 5♣, or a slam. I don't want to bid 4♦ as a 'cue' because that may be construed as a 5-6 shape nor do I want to bid 4♥ as that would suggest 1345 or 0346 inviting slam. So out of 4♣, 4♠ and 4NT I think 4♠ is good. I don't think it is "placing the contract" since with 3 card support I would've bid 3♠ over 3♣. What would 3♦ over 2♣ by partner have been? If it's a splinter then partner's most likely shape is 5224 and 4♠ should be just as good or better contract than 4NT so I think if partner bids 4NT over 4♠ it's keycard. However, that's a violation to one of my meta agreements where if 3NT is bid to play then a follow up of 4NT is to play as well but in this case if opener has a min we can play in 4♠ or 5♣ giving up on 4NT.

I play both as rescue redoubles. Putting it another way, my meta-agreements of redoubles in these type of auctions are for rescue. If you have certain exceptions here and there you may get yourself into a pickle in an undiscussed auction because redoubles can crop up anywhere. And the blue card is certainly not a one to mess around with!

uhh...with 5♥'s and an invitational hand what do you do? Jump to 3♥ and play in a potential 5-2 fit (5-1 here) or bid 2♦ and have opener bid 3♦ with this and you're back with the same problem.

I lead whatever looks right based on form of scoring, auction and contract. Sometimes that might just be from three small.