rogerclee

Duck trick one to protect against 4-1 spades.

Clee? I don't really want a spade lead. I only mildly want partner to raise to 2♠. I don't want partner to bid 3♠. I really don't want partner to bid 4♠. I don't understand why 1♠ is so obvious, the upside seems very small.

I would pass in the first auction but bid 1♠ in the second auction (it's too important to be able to bid 2♠ over 2♦/2♥). Edit, sorry, what I really mean is that in the second auction there is larger chance of a spade fit, so we have more incentive to overcall, but maybe the effect is smaller than I originally thought, in which case I would also pass.

x / qxxx / kqxx / kqxx is a signoff? Not hardly. LOL

I would respond 1♥ with either hand.

Double was beyond obvious at my first turn. I would bid 5♠ now I suppose, but it would have been nice to describe my hand at a more convenient level.

I don't think double is a good bid since if 2♦ gets raised we are in a bad position to describe our hand. If you think 3♥ over 3♦ or 4♥ over 4♦ should show a strong hand with 64 in the majors, then maybe you are right in principle, but I prefer to get good results at the table (I think it should be 5404 anyway).

LOL

I thought it was a push, 2♠x-1 into our teammates' 2N+3. You had the queen of spades, but that's it.

Yes, agree it is unsound. This seems like a bad idea to me. I think a good estimate is that your LHO will double this 1NT about 60% of the time you open. If you think this is a reasonable start for your side, then I think you should reconsider.

3♣ seems right on values, it's possible to miss game this way but unlikely. People should start thinking of 3N as a slam try, then maybe they wouldn't make so many bad 3N bids.

hehe

How original. :rolleyes: The hand is the classic example hand used to show the difficulties with "standard" systems and how strong 1C systems solve this problem. IMO there is no right or wrong or even "best" answer - there is just varying opinions. You open 2C, then bid 2S. Where is the problem? It is fine to hold strong opinions about the best approach, but to infer that there is no other way or no problems in that approach is something else indeed. Better stick to the Water Cooler, Winston. Anyway, I don't understand opening 1♠ with a hand this good.

I'd bid 4♥, let's put the pressure on.

2♥

I play 4♦ is fitted, but I would bid 4♠ anyway.

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=s82hj863dtcqj8752&s=sa643hk7dkj85cat6]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1N-2♠ 3♣-P LHO leads the ♥9, ducked to RHO's ♥A, who then shifts to the ♠Q.

I wouldn't double, and that's saying a lot!

I'd bid 2♠ the first time, bidding 3♠ the second time is beyond words.

Matchpoints ♠void ♥AT ♦AKTxxxxxx ♣Jx 1♦ - 1♠ ? Partner will bid 2♠ over 2♥, 3♠ over 3♦, 4♣ over 3♣, and 4♣ over 3N.

1) No blame 2) No blame 3) I think south bid his hand perfectly, the only reason 5♣ didn't work out is because north only has 3 trumps, south's hand is actually rather good if partner has 4 trumps as expected. North's bidding was totally misdescriptive, and it's not hard to see how it would turn out badly opposite hands like south's that are strong but short in spades.

No squeeze can operate unless we can eek out an extra trick in clubs, and the only way that's possible is if RHO has ♣97 or ♣T9. So we have to win trick 1, draw trumps, and play the ♣J from dummy. Win the return, and (assuming RHO plays the ♣7) take a ruffing finesse against LHO's ♣T (if RHO played the ♣9 from ♣T97, he got me). Then all we need is RHO to hold the ♦KQ and six spades to the K, and he will get ♦-♠ squeezed on the run of the hearts.

3♠ seems like a nothing bid to me, partner is supposed to know that this shows a 15 count? Either play partner for the wrong hand or the right hand, if you bid 3♠ all you are doing is increasing the level.

Presumably Axx xx AQxxxx Ax is also a good hand?

4♠