rogerclee

It's normal to play this double is takeout. The reason is that the opener, who is already very limited, is unlikely to have a pure penalty double opposite a partner who couldn't bid over 2♦. In fact, even if he does have a pure penalty double, he is reasonably happy to pass, since the opponents are probably already in a bad spot. However if he has a diamond doubleton (which is also much more frequent than a penalty double!), then it is usually right to compete. Maybe this will push the opponents up a level, maybe partner can convert the double with a reasonable hand and some diamonds, maybe the best spot is for you to just take a shot at 2M or 3♣.

♦3. Partner didn't double spades, but I don't think I would be inclined to lead this anyway. I try not to lead from Axxx against matchpoint NT contracts (and IMP contracts too, but to a lesser extent). ♣J is also an unattractive lead to me, since it requires so much from partner and can be very wrong whenever clubs is one of declarer's best suits (it will guess the suit for him, and will actually just blow up a trick reasonably often). Diamond is a reasonable middle ground.

If you play texas transfers, they are still on. Transferring to their suit becomes quite useless, but I would still play transfers are on because they are so important in this kind of auction (and to me it's easier). You can use the "useless" bid for some things, but they are not relevant to this particular subforum. Also remember that you can show invitational hands if your suit is bigger than their suit. For example 1N - (2♥) - ? 2N then 3♠ here is now invitational. However, you cannot invite in clubs or diamonds, so you either have to call it a signoff or a game force depending on your judgment (usually call it a game force!). Also you didn't mention this, but it's standard to play that: 1N - (2♥) - ? 3♥ = stayman, no stopper 2N then 3♥ = stayman with a stopper unless you reverse the stopper showing order (which is probably better, but standard in America is "slow shows"). Also it is easy to forget that a direct 3N denies holding a stopper in their suit (unless, as above, you reverse it). Don't worry if you don't get it at first, lebensohl is the hardest convention that intermediate players learn by far.

I wouldn't even be really surprised if 3N is the winning call, but it looks like I have a 4♥ bid.

West seems to have forgotten that presumably, NS play a strong NT, so I would just say he is just bad.

I like this post a lot and agree that 3♦ is the best call.

IMPs, All White, First Seat ♠ATxx ♥xx ♦KQ9x ♣A98 1♦ - (1♥) - 3♣ - (3♥) ? 1♦ was precision (2+♦), 3♣ was a fitted jump (not a game try). If it matters to you, you play 14-16 NT.

1310642

I think this is a pretty tough problem. 3♦ is an underbid, but both 2♠ and 3♣ (which are right on values but really wrong on shape) are pretty likely to get our side into a lot of trouble. I would bid 3♣ but don't feel that strongly about it.

If you get a spade back then you have two spade winners, so...well done? :)

Partner's pass should deny first round control. Now I bid 4♦, I don't see why this has to show a maximum, since a maximum will bid past 4♥ anyway.

I would have definitely opened 2♠, having ♥Jxxx is not a good enough reason to pass. Now I really think 4♠ here should be a choice of games between 4♠ and 5♦ so I feel I have to pass, since there are so many distributional hands that want to give partner a choice of games here and very very few hands where I would initially pass and now bid 4♠ to play. It's strange for me to be arguing that 4♠ should be fitted here, I am always one of the few who says that if it can be natural it's natural, lol. If I could bid 4♠ to play, I would do that. Partner won't reopen enough for passing to be right, and occasionally this will get us to slam.

1NT

Nothing seems very plausible, I would guess that partner has a spade stack and was hoping to be able to double some number of spades.

Please explain. If your argument is that 5♥ must be a 6-5 slam force because we have no other bid for it, then I would say this is not a very well-thought argument.

I would bid 5♣ but I think it's quite close. I think this is the kind of problem a double dummy simulator would do very well on.

I like 1♥. For 1♥: 1) Partner can compete effectively with 3♥ and not 4♠, and in fact partner may dislike his spade suit so much that we will miss a lot of spade fits even if we double. 2) Partner doesn't compete in clubs, which will be wrong more often than right. For double: 1) Doesn't lose spades. Spades can play better if partner's hearts are bad, but if partner's hearts are good the two strains rate to play about the same. Spades may also play better just because the opening bidder is on lead. 2) Increases the chance that we get a spade lead if partner is on lead. Even a club lead is probably better than a heart lead.

1) 4♥. This is a good example of a situation where we should bid game because 3♠ could be going down anyway, so we really want to be in 4♥ even if it has around a 25% chance of making. The opponents never double anyway, they are too scared of partner converting to 4♠ when we have hit a bad trump split. 2) 2NT, I thought this was crystal clear, considering that we can later bid a large number of hearts to show how good this hand is. 3) 3♥, game is good opposite a weak NT with minimal waste in spades.

This looks like a normal takeout double to me. It's true that most hands that would do this should have doubled 1♥, but that doesn't mean this should be penalty, which sounds much stranger to me.

I think this should show 6 spades, and so partner is definitely going to raise us with 2 spades and will sometimes raise us with a singleton. I think 5♦ will usually be a better contract in the first scenario and will almost always be better in the second scenario. If partner bids 4M after 4♦ it is a choice of games with 3 cards in the major, so we will still get to most of our 5-3 spade fits if we bid 4♦.

I agree with everything Josh wrote. 3♦ to me is a strange bid, unless we had no cheaper game-forcing bid, but at any rate I certainly would have bid 4♣ instead of 3NT. On the actual hand of course south has a pass, south has described his hand very well and north has placed the final contract.

I would bid 4♦. Saying that partner can double here is not meaningful, double does not show a good hand with diamonds. You will usually just bid 3M over this, which bypasses 3♦. Consequently it is standard for 3♦ here to show a good hand, or at least good playing strength, for diamonds. You just have to pass with minimum hands with 6♦, but that is really not so bad anyway.

I would open 1♣ and rebid 1N over partner's 1♥, Maggie.

I would double, I just don't think we are going to get a save often enough here to justify the (considerable) risk of being off two tricks in 6♦.

I just want to throw out there that in practice, I would just play for the pin and don't think it's that close. For some reason, it is much more common for LHO here to duck with Kxx than Kx. I don't know if I think this because in general there are more Kxx's than Kx's though.