rogerclee

1♣ WTP.

Yes. Wouldn't 5♦ show a willingness for diamonds? Yeah, but it wouldn't say a whole lot about spades.

I think I will bid 5♠, since I would bid 4♠ on hands which are much worse than the one I have.

I would bid 3♠. This hand is too likely to play better in spades than hearts, and I am willing to make a very small overbid to determine the best strain (which I think is a useful general principle).

That reminds me, I need to ask my partner what the hell he was thinking when he doubled.

3♥, ♠KJ is awful.

Double and lead a small heart.

I agree with 5NT if it's pick a slam, but I am not sure at all that this is standard here. Like TimG, I think GSF may be more commonly interpreted, since spades is the only strain we have clearly offered.

I think an intiial x is clear, since we are getting rich if partner can sit. Over 3♠, I guess I am out of ways to show the minors, so I will unhappily bid 4♦. Over 3NT, I will just pass. Over 4♠, I think I will just bid 6♠. This might not make, but I am never really going to seven, and I don't see any way to stop short of slam.

3♠. I'm on the fence about my pass the previous round, but I guess I agree.

1♦ - (3♣) - P - (P) 3♦ - (P) - 3♠ Does 3♠ exist? Is it forcing? What does it show?

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sak8haqj6dj7cq982&s=st532hk4dq5cakjt3]133|200|Scoring: BAM[/hv] Bid these two hands in an uncontested auction using whatever system(s) you'd like. Can you reach the top spot? Rotated for jdonn's convenience.

Auto 4♥. It is too likely that our hands mesh well (ruffing my losing diamonds for example). Without any room to investigate, I will just push.

There are too many points in this deck. Anyway I pass.

I think this is definitely good enough to GF, and I will go through 3♦.

I guess I will be the first person to say 5♠, and I don't really think it is close.

A problem from an old newspaper I was flipping through and initially found uninteresting: IMPs, All Red, First Seat ♠AQJ94 ♥JT8 ♦A6 ♣KQ4 1♠ - (2♥) - Dbl - (P) ?

Uncontested 1♣ - 1♥ 2♥ - 3♣ 3♣ is?

I don't understand what is so strange about this bid. A grand is way too ambitious, so I am just going to bid 6♦. I don't like 5NT as much, but I think this is acceptable.

1) Agree 2) Agree 3) Agree 4) Forcing. I think it is normal for this to be NF when partner has not shown values and F when it has.

For a long time it was in style to open 1♣ on black two-suiters. Now I think generally it is more common (and better) to open these 1♠. I personally almost always open 5-5 in the blacks 1♠. It is only when the spades are really awful and the clubs really good that I deviate.

I think I should've phrased it as "I am surprised nobody has discussed a 4♥ opening." I am not seriously defending 4♥; there is just too much defense, the trumps are god-awful, and diamonds could easily be the right strain. I just think that people, in general, do not open 4M enough. 4M is a huge pressure bid that has so many ways to win. Change the red suits around and I would auto 4♥.

Settle a bet: (1m) - 1♥ - (P) - 1♠ 1♠ means what?

I am surprised nobody has voted for 4♥, which would receive some sympathy from me, but I understand that I may like opening 4M more than pretty much anyone.

Yes, if partner has a 12-count and we can make game, they got me. If partner has a random 3-count, I am in NV 1400 territory. These events do not have equal probabilities of occurring.