rogerclee

3♥, middle of the road. I wouldn't open 4♥ at w/r, I think, but it would be quite tempting. Edit, after practice bidding with Han over 4♥ preempts, I would now open this hand 4♥.

LOL

Since this is an interesting hand, I'll play the ♣Q.

I would bid 1NT, in my experience hands like this (long minor) do better to declare than defend. To clarify, I'm bidding 1NT after I already doubled last round.

routine double

I can confirm that this works.

I would double, this is going to be a slaughter.

We have been over this already, 1N in competition shows 6-10 in Orange County and England, but extras everywhere else.

Double. I think I have a little egg on my face.

I would bid 5♦ in either case. Opposite your first type of hand I think partner should bid 5NT, which suggests grand slam interest but nothing to cuebid. I can't construct any hands that would bid a grand slam over 5NT missing one keycard that would not have bid Blackwood instead of 5♦ on the last round. I can't get to a grand slam opposite your hand without the ♣Q, but I can live with that. By the way, I would open the first hand 2♣ but not the second. This has less to do with the quality of the hand and more with the awkwardness of the rebid, but I could be convinced to open both of them 2♣.

I think anyone who makes a slam try on this hand did not even bother to think about what kind of hands slam is good on. I would make a slam try if I had a bid available to ask whether or not partner has 6 solid clubs and both major kings. Slam is not even cold opposite this hand, it's just good.

I guess there are some implications of this (I didn't think of it when I said I'd bid 2♠), but there are also implications for overcalling anyway (partner knows we have a very very sound overcall). Anyway it is authorized information to everyone that partner is barred, so everyone knows that I could be bidding 2♠ on a wide variety of hands.

I would bid 2♠.

majors

Looks like a routine pass to me, we barely have the values to make a takeout double of 1♥!

Pass and pass, having a singleton in partner's suit is enough for me to play for penalties.

Way to go Andy!

Looked like a normal 1♥ bid to me. To Josh, the answer is yes.

IMPs, All Red, Fourth Seat ♠Axx ♥Kxxx ♦xxxxx ♣K (1♦) - 2♣ - (P) - ?

IMPs, White vs Red, Fourth Seat ♠Qxxx ♥Axx ♦Kx ♣Qxxx (1♦) - 2♣ - (2♥*) - ? 2♥ was not forcing (not clear if it promised minimal values). Partner likes to overcall 2♣ over 1♦ at this vulnerability (but he's not insane). You play 2NT here is natural.

I think partner is 6-5, so I just bid 6♦.

Looks normal to bid 5♥ here, it's too easy for either 4♠ or 5♥ to be making in my opinion.

This is a normal 3♥ bid (albeit a minimum). Now, this is a problem. Everyone is opening all sorts of crap. So, when they hold a real opening bid, such as this one, they jump raise to 3♥ to differentiate this hand from the crap they normally open. (Parenthetically, the opening hand is a 6 loser hand by LTC, which is an above-average opening. The 1♥ response improves the ♥Q somewhat.) I would raise to 2♥ on these cards (knowing that I had something in reserve) and I would expect my partner to invite on the other hand. Clearly, after bidding "just" 2♥, I would accept any invitation. Everyone on this site would respond 1♥ to 1♦ if they held Txxx Txxx Jx KJx. Good luck in 3♥. Art, even LTC ("6 losers"), which in my opinion is not a useful means of hand evaluation, agrees that this hand is within the 3♥ range. I would say that if you think this is only a 2♥ rebid, then you need to rethink your hand evaluation, it is very easy for you to miss game/slam by bidding 2♥. Of course bidding 3♥ can work out poorly and your example hand is noted, but that is why I try to use probability to determine when a call will work well and when it will work poorly, then make an educated guess about which one is better.

This is a normal 3♥ bid (albeit a minimum).

Disagree with this line, I gave up an endplay against east (pitch a spade on the ♦T) for no reason.