louisg

Why would it be clear to partner that we are never playing 4Sx? If my hand were something like KJx x Axxx QJxxx (assuming that's an opening bid in your style), I would want to suggest 4Sx as a final contract and would expect partner to honor that much of the time. Here I bid 5D, since I know I don't want to defend and also don't want to suggest extra values. Pass, as always in these auctions, would suggest doubt, except if you are planning to pass and pull to show slam interest (the commonly accepted interpretation, though not universal).

[hv=d=e&v=n&n=skjthjxxxxdakxcjx&s=sa9xxxxxhqxdxckxx]133|200|Scoring: MP Club game. Local pro on your left, weak player on your right. (1D) 2S (P) 3S (4D) 4S (Dbl) AP You may not agree with the auction (neither do I), but the final contract is fine and the play's the thing. The opening lead is a small ♦, but not readable as to whether or not it is a singleton. Plan the play.[/hv]

Me too, although I am waiting for louisg to correct the dummy before i play to trick one :P Go ahead, it looks OK to me :D And yes, EW was playing UDCA (and dummy played the ♠J at trick one -- have to add something to the original post after all :)).

Just out of curiosity. Are the two places to play "The Twilight Zone" and a mental institution? Really, this is a clear pass. If something else would have worked, that is the way it goes. Why the sarcasm Art? Whatever you may think of the merits of doubling with the particular hand in question, it is undoubtably true that doubling in this auction with 2=3=4=4 distribution is more attractive when you know that you can find your longest combined fit when partner has 4 hearts and a 4 card minor.

As long as I'm helping to set the record straight here, it might also be relevant that the 1♦ opening was in 3rd seat. Not sure if that makes bidding more attractive (since both opps are at least somewhat limited), but it seems worth mentioning.

If this is from the deal that I think it is, the hand in question held ♥Qxx. Edit: It might also be worth mentioning that the partnership in question uses a 2NT response to double here as "two places to play".

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=saxxxhada98xcaqxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] RHO opens 2H in second seat. You double, and partner responds 2NT (lebensohl). 3♣ or 3♥? More importantly, what is your thought process?

I've seen a lot of criticism of the double, but no real discussions of the alternatives. Do we pass and miss an easy vul game opposite something like xxx AKTxxx x AQx (ducking the DK lead at trick one in 4H)? Not to mention the fact that partner may have spades well held and was unable to act last round. Does 2NT really show two small spades (the suit they are most likely to lead once it becomes apparent that we have a diamond stack)? Who knows how partner would take a 3D bid? Yes, I realize that this may not be the textbook holding for a double ("penalty double of diamonds and some defence against 2♠", as stated by gnasher), but when compared with the alternatives I don't think it looks all that bad. Additional comments welcome.

If pass is that obvious, then maybe the -570 we achieved on this board was North's fault. North's hand was: ♠xx ♥QJ ♦AJxxxxx ♣Kx Any suggestions?

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sqjxhakt8xxdctxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Pass 1♥ 2♦ Pass 2♠ Pass Pass Dbl Pass ??

Don't get too excited; that 18 VPs in the second round is for their bye :D

The thread on 2NT overcalls reminded me that I've been looking for some time for a scientific structure over 3NT overcalls. Ideally it would allow for various ranges of balanced hands as well as overcalls based on a long suit. Of course space is very limited here, but I think I've seen suggestions based on a 4C reply as an artificial hand-type ask. I don't remember any details though. Does anyone play anything that they are happy with here? What are the pros and cons that you've found? TIA.

No one has mentioned it yet, but I thought it was fairly common practice when playing penalty doubles in this auction to use 2NT as the rough equivalent of a negative double. Partner knows you have some values but not enough in their suit to make a penalty double, and can sit or pull as his hand dictates. Of course, this is incompatable with lebensohl.

At the risk of looking foolish...... I'm going to assume from the club spots that LHO started with ♣Kxx, and led clubs because he has length in both majors (this is corroborated by the switch to the ♦Q instead of a low one). My plan is to knock out the ♣Q, win the likely diamond return, and cash my minor suit winners (throwing spades from dummy). I now need 3 tricks from hearts, and need to hope that the ♥A is onside (otherwise the opps will have diamond winners to cash when they get in). Since I can only lead hearts once from hand, my choices are to play LHO for either ♥AJx or ♥Axxx(x). I hope to get some clues from the discards on the minor suit winners, but given LHO's presumed major suit length I'm inclined to try to drop the ♥J. Edit: Should have said that LHO started with ♣Jxx.

Just one quibble....isn't it better for South to bid 4H? He can see potential discards of spade losers on diamonds, for example facing a hand like Axx AKJxx xx Kxx 4H looks to be a much safer contract than 4S.

Here's a question for those who use Serious or Non-Serious 3NT (I'll assume Non-Serious, but I don't think it matters for purposes of this question). Assume that the bidding starts 1S-2H-3H-3S, where 3S shows 3 card support. If opener's 3NT is Non-Serious and opener's 4C/4D are serious, what do opener's 4H/4S bids mean? Is there a lower limit to the Non-Serious 3NT, so that opener's 4M denies even that much? If so, I can imagine these hands stopping at the 4 level. Responder needs opener to have the equivalent of 4 working cards out of ♠AK, ♦AK, ♥Q, and can assume that opener would be worth at least a Non-Serious 3NT with this much.

Presumably 2NT was "unusual", showing secondary diamonds with values to bid to the 3 level.

Evasive action? What are you talking about? I've described my hand, and partner bid 3NT to play. What am I supposed to be afraid of? A reasonable hand for partner might be ♠QJx ♥Kxx ♦Axxxx ♣Ax.

Really? What about when opener has 2 small spades? After 4S he can clarify the extent of his ambitions (or just take control with RKCB), but after 4H he has to bid 5C regardless of the rest of his hand. The same applies over 4♠, when he doesn't know that his side suit is solid. So that's neither better nor worse.... Say you are responder with ♠Axx ♥Kx ♦xxxxx ♣xxx. The bidding goes: 1♣-1♦ 2♥-3♣ 4♣-4♥ 5♣ Do you bid again? Does partner have ♠xx ♥AQJ ♦K ♣AKQxxxx, or ♠xx ♥AQJ ♦A ♣AKxxxxx? Had you bid 4♠ however, partner with the second hand would know that slam was at worst on a finesse, and might be better. But why wouldn't partner cuebid 4♦ instead of bidding 4♣ with the second hand - anticipating the problem? Not sure if you are really suggesting that partner jump to 4♦, or if you meant to type 3♦ instead, but to me 3♦ would suggest real support (suggesting a trump suit with something like 1=4=3=5). A jump to 4♦ is not clearly defined, but without specific agreement I'd be very hesitant to assume that partner would take it as a "cuebid".

Really? What about when opener has 2 small spades? After 4S he can clarify the extent of his ambitions (or just take control with RKCB), but after 4H he has to bid 5C regardless of the rest of his hand. The same applies over 4♠, when he doesn't know that his side suit is solid. So that's neither better nor worse.... Say you are responder with ♠Axx ♥Kx ♦xxxxx ♣xxx. The bidding goes: 1♣-1♦ 2♥-3♣ 4♣-4♥ 5♣ Do you bid again? Does partner have ♠xx ♥AQJ ♦K ♣AKQxxxx, or ♠xx ♥AQJ ♦A ♣AKxxxxx? Had you bid 4♠ however, partner with the second hand would know that slam was at worst on a finesse, and might be better.

Really? What about when opener has 2 small spades? After 4S he can clarify the extent of his ambitions (or just take control with RKCB), but after 4H he has to bid 5C regardless of the rest of his hand. We have this agreement with respect to partner's main suit, but not with respect to a second suit, especially when that second suit may have been manufactured.

Well, we now have votes for 2NT (minors) and 2NT (lebensohl). Does the OP have an agreement for what 2NT would have meant for him? I certainly wouldn't want to risk bidding it without an agreement..... Edit: By the way, I personally wouldn't use lebensohl in this auction, but why can't 2NT be natural? What else do you bid with something like Qxx xxx Qxxx Kxx? A penalty pass is very risky, 3C doesn't express your values, and 3NT seems like too much.

"If it is relevant to you, at the table, 1♠ was actually 11-15HCP and RHO bid 2♣, a transfer to diamonds." I think it's very relevant. In the problem as given, I'd have doubled 2D last round and gotten this off my chest. In the ATT problem, this double might not have been available (since it would probably be taken to show clubs). I have to bid 3C now, expecting partner to have something resembling a big 1=4=3=5.

Playing a standard-based system with your favorite partner, your auction starts as follows: 1C-P-1D(1)-P 2H-P-3C(2)-P 4C(3)-P-4S(4)-X P(5)-P-XX(6)-P (1) Walsh-style (2) Simply a preference, not necessarily real support if nothing else fits (3) Sets trump (4) Usually first round controls before second round (5) 2nd round spade control (6) 1st round spade control You hold one of the following two hands: (Y) x/AJx/AK/AKJxxxx (Z) x/AQJx/A/AKJxxxx In both cases, you can now infer that partner has real club support, since he chose to bypass 2NT while holding the spade A. You are therefore driving to a small slam, and have real interest in a grand. With hand (Y), it would be nice to bid 5D now, suggesting the DK along with the red aces, and hoping that partner will realize the value of a hand like Axx/xx/Qxxxx/Qxx. With hand (Z), it would be nice to bid 5D now, leaving room for partner to cuebid the heart King. How would you resolve this (or similar) dilemmas in your favorite partnership? By the way, if you strongly believe that either or both of these hands should be opened 2C instead of 1C then I sympathize with you, but save your breath and try to address the more general question please. Thank you.

In fact, declarer had ♠KQx and ♦AKx, and a shift to either pointed suit will work (but note that if declarer also had the ♦T you would need to shift to a spade). Regarding the opening lead problem, note that it is necessary to lead a club at trick one to establish your club trick before it can go on a spade. It's an interesting situation IMO; you have to set up your club trick at trick one but avoid cashing it when you regain the lead. The full deal: [hv=d=e&n=sat72hjdqt53cq942&w=sj9h98743d8762c65&e=skq5hakt2dak4caj8&s=s8643hq65dj9ckt73]399|300|[/hv]