kayin801

Used to be a mixed raise, now it's nat and invitational

Pass, I usually don't overbid my hand twice. I think they will make 4S without a problem. Partner hasn't Xed them after we showed something and we have no tricks and only a little help in clubs, so it's not outrageous for a sacrifice to cross our mind. But -800 seems too easy if we bid, and the hands that we go for less we might beat 4S.

This then

1♠. Wait, I can't do that?

I guess I'd further ask the difference between a direct KC and a re-transfer and then KC, but that's probably irrelevant. I like 4♦ over 4♥, if that is what Han is asking, seems cooperative and it'd be nice to see what p does after that before completely committing.

I guess I can imagine a couple layouts where 3NT is better than 4♥ (AQJxx, xxxxx, Ax, x or something looks unpleasant on trump leads) but I'm no hero, easy 4♥.

3♣ to part 1, near-WTP, though I have some sympathy for 2♣ if I wanted to be clever (famous last words: if we can only survive this round...) Without the ♦Q, 2♦ and anything else is insane, unless I've miscounted the points again (AAKKJ left?)

Thanks Hanoi!

Looking for a host for some time this (Saturday) evening, we are pretty open. Any time from now going forward is good. We are both on the web-client. Thanks!

B-C have a section in their book that suggests transfer responses as a potential alternative to natural responses. This is what I started out using. If you liked those particular responses to 1C (I don't) then I think Richard's MOSCITO has similarish responses to start, which could then be tweaked? I could be horribly mistaken though and I'm definitely far too lazy to look up if I'm right or not :lol:

I have X to show this hand (1S shows 4+) but without that agreement X is still the best lie. 2♣ is the only other thing that comes to mind.

As I recall, Berkowitz's book has a good treatment of non-relay Precision. Have you considered just pointing your friends at that? My regular partner and I play our club system without relays with Berkowitz-Cohen at its core and love it. It's simple and flexible.

Bump, looking for a host now-ish, Hanoi, are you on? I don't have you listed.

If you can do just after 3, that would work well for us. Josh needs to use the browser so we can use that, though I typically use the program.

If there's anyone who can host for the bidding contest between roughly 1-5 PM EST today, sohcahtoa and I would like to bid. He promises to actually show up this time. Thanks!

I think AH missed that RHO opened 1♥, not partner. I would bid 2♦ r/w and definitely w/w, if you took a black spot and moved it to hearts now I would feel a little dirtier about it.

How bad is a 3♥ rebid? Just throwing that out there, though I don't feel comfortable making it. (I would bid 1♦-1♥-3♦-P)

I'm okay with the auction but I might have just bid 2♦ over 1NT. I would also lead the diamond A. The dangerous case in the play is Flameous' layout where partner has the ♣K and the ♥Q, and we don't want to give declarer any free finesses because he has no chance of making 9 tricks unless we pick off partner's honors. It might seem weird but I kinda like a low spade, ultra passive, which only seems to lose when partner has a singleton spade and a singleton diamond (and didn't bid?!). Sometimes partner has queen-doubleton spade and doubleton diamond and we have 10 tricks, and in all but the worst case we have 5 tricks since declarer has to let partner in to lead a pointed suit to us. If we're looking to tie 600 for our diamond or NT game if its there, we also need to lead a spade since we need to find partner with the Q of spades and at least 2 diamonds.

When we only have a single stopper in one suit and are missing a club honor (especially the Q), isn't 3NT a lot worse, since we have to guess where that club honor is? DD results are gonna assume we always get the club suit right... Of course, we might have a club loser, 2 spade losers, and another side loser in 4♠ anyway when we similarly misguess, so maybe its right.

I would X every time, and I think 3♠ by N is forcing over 3♣. If we were interested in hearing about only one of our majors he might try X instead of 3♠ (looks like t/o to me BECAUSE my X doesn't promise club length for sure). From there, I'm not sure I would get to our 4-4 fit instead of our 6-4 fit, but oh well, maybe... ... 3♠ 4♦-etc etc 6♠ Maybe if I find a pick-a-slam somewhere in there I can get to 6♥, but I don't really have pick-a-spam as an option as I would bid it here.

3♥ = horrendous. I liked aguahombre's auction, but I could also see: 1♦-2♣ 2♦-2♠ 2NT-3♣ 3♠-? And then it gets tricky from there? I can't even think of something reasonable to get to 7NT unless someone fakes agreeing a suit intending to correct to NT later (maybe in lieu of 3♠ too). I'm likely to end up in 6NT.

I would expect 4♦ to be slam invitational at worst with diamonds, diamonds, and more diamonds, since partner opted to skip an entire level of bidding and eliminated 3NT as a possibility. Use whatever your bid for RKC is and get to the right number of diamonds or 7NT. Edit: sniped by bluecalm :)

This hand brings up an interesting bidding set piece of logic though. I don't think South can reopen if North passes at the table, but in a bidding contest letting them play in 4S white undoubled is completely absurd. Maybe it's not in the spirit of the contest to take advantage of this, but if you do so you can easily pass the North hand and then partner has an almost mandatory reopening X regardless of what they have! Therefore almost all passes of 4 level preempts become penalty :P To take this a step further, then 5C directly has to be stronger than passing and bidding 5C when partner mandatorily reopens.

I bid the north hand and after my partner opened 1♣ 16+, I showed 4 spades and longer clubs with 0-2 controls. I wonder if I should continue after partner's signoff in 4♠ though since I don't have to have 2 singletons in the other suits.

Contracts look correct to me.