Poky

You hold: ♠K10x ♥- ♦AKJ9872 ♣A10x Bidding: 1♦-2♣-Dbl-pass 3♣-pass-4♥!!! a> Do you agree with opener's 3♣ rebid? b> What holds our partner with Dbl and 4♥? c> What would be responder's 4♣ rebid?

19 HCP, you say? So you are expecting something like... ♠AQJxx(x) ♥AQx(x) ♦x ♣AQx(x) ...and bid 2♠?

IMP. Only we are vul. [hv=d=n&v=n&s=s10654h43dj986c1093]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♠ - pass - pass - 2♦ Dbl - pass - ???[/hv] Is this problem trivial?

8 losing tricks. Too much for me...

Ty all for answers and comments! I was holding... [hv=s=sj9xhxxdxxxcakqjx]133|100|[/hv] ...for this bidding. Would anybody double on 1st round with this hand?

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sak62haq862d2c1083]133|100|Scoring: IMP pa-pa-1♥-3♦ pa-pa-Dbl-pa 4♦[/hv] Describe a typical hand your partner (asssume an expert) will hold for his bidding (pass->pass->4♦).

At Cavendish they played something similar to: 1♣ = 4+♣ or bal 1♦ = (4)5+♦ 1M = 5+M 1NT = 12-14 or 15-17 (depending of position/vulnerability) 2♣ = 18-19 bal 2♦ = Any GF 2M = weak-2 2NT = 20-22 bal Recenty they switched the 2♣/2♦ openings but I think the "Cavendish version" works better (18-19 balanced hand come more often so should be opened lower to keep all transfers). The developent after 2♣ opening is something like: 2♦ = ♥transfer 2♥ = ♠transfer 2♠ = puppet to 2NT (placing contract or minor oriented hands) 2NT = ♣transfer 3♣ = ♦transfer 3♦ = Stayman ...etc. This system works very well cause unloads the 1♣/1♦ openings and make the competitive bidding more accurate.

Balancing = 15% ( i voted for 25%). Many bad features: - ♠Qx (defensive oriented hand) - bad suits - only 2 clubs (have to pass 3♣) If I think this hand has competitive prospects I would Dbl the 1♠ opening right away (intending to pass 2♣).

I think it is a good idea but it makes the development after 1♣/1♦ openings pretty complex. Any useful idea? Should after the 1♦ opening the bidding be natural or relay-oriented? Maybe this way: 1♥= 4+♥, natural 1♠= Relay, 10+ 1NT= natural, no 4H 2m= 5+m, 6-11, non forcing 2♥= TRF, invitational with 4+♠, 9-11 2♠= to play, 6-9 eith 3+♠

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sak83hadkj6caq1092]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♣ - pass - 1♦ - 1♥ ??? P.S. Sorry, this hand holds 21 hcp, not 22 as noted in description!

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sajt9xxha9xd8xxxc]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♠ - 2♥ - 3♦ - pass ???

What would you bid then with the following hand on 1♠?[hv=s=sxhaqt9dxxxcjxxxx]133|100|[/hv] Would you pass initially on 1♥ or not?

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=stxhxxxdjxxxxcqxx&w=sxxxhkjtdaq9xxckt&e=sakqj9xhxxxdxcxxx&s=sxxhaqxxdktcaj9xx]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] .......................3♠ - Dbl Rdbl - pass - pass - 4♣ pass - pass - pass 4♣, -4, +200

This was the doubler's hand: [hv=v=n&s=saq9xxhxdkqjtxcax]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The auction went ...1NT - all pass. +4, +210.

1) Is parnter 1♠ bid showing a good or a bad hand. Good hand, obviously. He didn't bid 1♠ directly on 1♦. 2) What is a logical explaination of why partner pulled our 1♥ dbl'ed? Because he thinks 1♥x is for us a bad contract: a ) Maybe bacause it is a maker (partner having 0/1♥), b ) Maybe because the penalty would be too small (our side having +600/+620) If your partner had the same hand he had for his bid in auction #2, he could easily and safely afford a jump to 2♠ to share this good news with you. Why? A hand with 16 HCP and 5♠ isn't the same as a hand with 19 HCP and 6♠. I think his hand could easily be something like...♠KQT9x ♥Jxxx ♦Kx ♣xx. Sorry, but I think that pass is a 120% clear-cut with this hand on 1♥x. No need to make any nebulous bid.

Hmm. Only two simply questions. 1) Is your 1NT intended as forcing or not? 2) With what kind of hand would you respond 2NT and would this 2NT be forcing?

IMP. Only we vul. [hv=d=e&v=n&s=s74haqt7d652cqj93]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] (1♣) - pass - (1♦) - Dbl* (1♥) - Dbl** - (pass) - 1♠ (pass) - ??? * Take-out double ** Penalty double, usually exactly 4-carder

Sure. ;) I play inverted doubles long time, even before Ben posted his thread. But only in forcing situations when we show 20+ hcp on our line. They work fine in my system - a great improvement.

I play it this way: 1♥ - Dbl Rdbl = 10+ 1♠ = 5+♣ 1NT = 5+♠ 2♣ = 5+♦ 2♦ = 7+ raise 2♥ = 0-6 raise 2♠ = fit-jump 2NT = offensive 9+ raise 3♣/3♦ = fit-jump 1♠ - Dbl Rdbl = 10+ 1NT = 5+♣ 2♣ = 5+♦ 2♦ = 5+♥ 2♥ = 7+ raise 2♠ = 0-6 raise 2NT = offensive 9+ raise 3♣/3♦/3♥ = fit-jump Rdbl is transfer to next higher suit only if the opening was 1♣/1♦. This structure works very fine.

North: 5% South: 95% 1) Is north too good for splinter? No. 2) Should south bid 4NT directly Yes. 3) What should north bid over 4♠, and would 5♦ promise a ♦ void. 5♥. 5♦ is void.

Test. (How to delete it???)

1) 4♠ directly, cause I'll never play anything below 4♠ 2) If 3♦ was 0-6 - pass, if 3♦ was 6-9 - 3♠, intending to pass 3NT or 4♦. 3) Pass - misfitting

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=saq2hkt64dcaqj976]133|100|Scoring: MP pass - (3♠) - ???[/hv] We are vulnerable.

Dealer: South Vul: Both Scoring: MP ♠ 64 ♥ QT9876 ♦ J ♣ 8654 ♠ K872 ♥ K5 ♦ 5432 ♣ KQ7 1♦ - All pass 1st trick: ♣K - ♣4 - ♣10 - ♣2 You are playing UDCA.

This is our history of hand... :huh: [hv=d=s&v=n&n=stxxxhkqxxdxxcjxx&w=sxxxhxxxdqxxcxxxx&e=skqjxxhdatxxcakqx&s=sahajtxxxdkjxxcxx]399|300|Scoring: IMP 4Hx -790 After heart lead and guessing diamonds right.[/hv]