rogerclee

The main reason for bidding 1N here is that you will often make 1N when they can make 1♠. Getting to game opposite the right hand is just a side benefit.

I don't play Han's methods, so I would start with a double.

2♠

Codo I am a firm believer that if you are a non-expert who wants to play like an expert, you should try your best to play like an expert.

1N

Pass

4♥ I think bidding 3♠ is terrible.

Rob if your point is that there are some problems with playing negative doubles, I believe you.

IMPs, All Red, Third Seat ♠KQJx ♥AKJ9x ♦x ♣xxx P - (2♦) - ?

As usual, Adam, you were right.

Systems on.

2N

x AQxx AKJx AKJx xx AQxx AKJx AKx

Abstain, I'm never the worst player at the table. Ok ok, 5♠.

4♠, people need to stop being scared of 1N openers.

On the first auction I would bid 4♣, which seems natural to me, though maybe the scientists disagree. On your second auction 6♣ seems very obvious.

I only have 12 points including a singleton king, but the club suit is very good, so I will upgrade and open 1♣.

At the table I would just bid 4NT, since I don't want a misunderstanding, and this could easily lead to a good 6m or 6N slam. I think you can play two schemes here Transfers: 4♣ = ♦ 4♦ = ♠ 4♥ = minors (or swap 4♦/4♥) 4♠ = ♣ or Natural: 4♣ = ♣ 4♦ = ♦ 4♥ = minors 4♠ = ♠ I'm not sure what's better, but I am sure that stayman is a waste.

This isn't really fair, as it's clear that East has never played bridge before.

I don't believe my vulnerable opponents. Double.

This isn't really fair, as it's clear that North has never played bridge before.

2♦.

I like it, but it's technically midchart in the ACBL, which is enough of a reason for me to not play it.

I have always played that if declarer claims a beer, and dummy can later prove that declarer misplayed the hand by a non-trivial percent, then declarer owes dummy a beer.

2♣, violently opposed to 4♣.