OleBerg

1) 4♥, not that I'm happy. 2) An attempt Red vs white, playing 4-card majors. Playing with a partner that virtually guarantees four spades. (Not my approach, but might be within the limits of "sane".) ♠ 65432 ♥2 ♦ AQ ♣ K10987

In the bidding, my blame goes to North. A double of 3♦ looks so much like a penalty-double to me, that I wouldn't dare to bid it withouth a firm agreement. (It would probably be take-out according to Robson - Seagal though.) In my book a double of 4♦ is take-out, for which North has the perfect hand: - Strength to bid again. - Only three spades. - The unbid suit is an option. The 5♠ call over 5♦ is playing partner for the perfect hand. (Which they never have.) Can't see anything fancy in the play.

No, everyone agrees with me. I agree.

Everybody agrees with me.

Good idea, but unluckily not possible in the good new online world. Here you need a more sensible way. Not possible with screens either. And even without screens, a competent director will invoke §23.

I would. Non-vulnerable it is a wtp? (For me :D ) Edit: Assuming 15-17, or that partner wouldnt double with 14.

Strongly suggesting partner competes to 3♥. In my case this would be a three-card support and maximum. As I play that 2♥ can be off-shape (5♥ and 4 in another), partner can double with a maximum hand and thrumphs stacked. Maybe it would be better with different meanings at different vulnerabileties? (Have to admit this doesn't really seems theoretically sound, but I play it nonetheless. (Hope partner playes it too.))

For a compulsive overbidder like me, 2♦ is a wtp?.

2♥ 2

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sa103h1094da5caj632&s=s64hakj32dj63ck85]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1♥- 2♣ 3♣ - 4♥[/hv] After a boring auction, opponents lead the ♦4 (fourth best.) How do you play this? Three plans springs to (my) mind. 1) A heart to the ace, and a club finesse. 2) Two rounds of hearts and three rounds of clubs. 3) Duck a diamond, planning to ruff a diamond, and finesse both soft suits (first round finesse in heart, second round finesse in clubs). 2) Looks to shaky for me, and 3) seems the natural way to play, but does 1) have any merit? Or have I missed another, better plan? (At the table anything would have worked, so no second-guessing is needed.)

Not me. (And I am an expert, just check my profile on BBO. :) ) Whats your bid with: ♠ AKQ53 ♥ AQ42 ♦ 97 ♣ A6 Edit: Off course, if it is 2/1 you can bid 3♥.

4♥ to play. (Jump to game ih a higher-ranking suit.) Both splinter and fitbids makes sense, but that would have to be agreed upon. 4NT for the minors or quant. Depends on who I play with.

I think you are right. Is it the best plan?

Full hand: [hv=d=w&v=n&n=s965hakq85d5ck1083&w=sak107hdak9842caq5&e=sj842h10432dqcj762&s=sq3hj976dj10763c94]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] I'm glad a few posters went with my choice , the club lead. As can be seen, it wasn't a succés. A heart lead and a heart force when in with the ♣K sinks it.

Imps. 1♦-1♥ 1♠-3♠ 4♦-4♥ 4NT-5♣ 5♦-5NT 6♣-6♠ 1♠ showed an unbalanced hand. 3♠ was forcing. 4♦ showed strenght in diamonds and was slammy. 4♥ Last train. 4NT 3 aces out of 5. 4♣ Cue. 5♦ Cue. 5NT Promises the last two aces. 6♣ Promises the thrumph queen. 6♠ No interest in a grand at all. Imagine you are on lead against the worlds greatest declarer. (If you find she would never play such silly methods, just assume she was hired by a sponser who insisted.) Your leads are 1./3./5. What do you lead from: ♠ 962 ♥ K732 ♦ K8 ♣ KJ107

Lol. 4144 with 19-20 hcp would not be overbidding? No it wouldn't. It would be insane. (You can count it out.)

Not an underbidder, sensible declarer. Maybe 4♠ is a little strange. Nonetheless, you have to find a lead.

Well, the 4♠ bidder is a junior, but the 6♠ bidder is a very competent player.

Thx. Hope the edit helped.

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sq3hj976dj10763c94]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] (1♦) - 1♥ - (pass) - 3♥ (-X-) - Pass - (4♠) - Pass (6♠) - Pass - Pass - Pass Sorry if this is too much like Hans hand, but this is how it happened at the table. Your lead? Edit: 2♥ bid changed to 3♥

Why couldn't partner just cuebid 4♠, then we bid 5♣, he bids 5♥, we bid 6♣? I don't understand why you feel he had to stop cuebidding, and instead bid keycard when his follow up was totally unclear. It sounds like you want 5♠ to mean "go back to cuebidding now", which just doesn't make sense after he chose to stop doing so. I also don't get why we couldn't have just kept cue-bidding. Partner already knows we have a 6-card club suit. If he has solid diamonds, the major suit aces and a doubleton club he can also work out how the play will go in 7D. This may be redundant, but is it really obvious for the 10-count opener with one ace, to keep on cuebidding? If it is, does partner promise 4 aces with his 5♥-bid? Well this was actually the point I was trying to make. Our hand is hardly worth an opening, and we have already cuebid in 4♥. But, as partner discloses information about his hand, which he does, our hands suitabilety for a grand improves immensely. It is much better than say: ♠ Q1098 ♥ KQ2 ♦ 5 ♣ AJ1098 In the sequence we should be able to diagnose, that all partner needs is a source of tricks. And our club suit might be that source. Like earlier noted, with AKQxx of clubs 7♦ is obvious, so 6♣ should be something like this.

So do I, but this was how the cards were at the table. At least give me credit for not posting it in the World-Class Forum.

Why couldn't partner just cuebid 4♠, then we bid 5♣, he bids 5♥, we bid 6♣? I don't understand why you feel he had to stop cuebidding, and instead bid keycard when his follow up was totally unclear. And during all those bids, it would be quite clear that we held all the aces? And the given hand would have the stamina for three cuebids on a 10 count opener with only one ace? Well, more like "going back to cooperative mode". This is what both players were in agreement about. I think it makes quite some sense. Some of the arguments for this is in my reply to Lobowolf, but I may add, that it seems quite awkward to me, to define the continuation as some specific kind of asking bids, when so few bids are available. For instance there is not enuogh steps for a specific king ask.

This may be true when you are headed for a small slam. When a grand is your aim, this changes things somehow. When the bidding approaches 4nt, somebody has to ask for aces, to make sure they are all there. So on the actual hand; even though partner wanted to be in the cooperative mode, he had to ask for aces, as it would obviously be far from certain that we would do it, if he didn't.

Hi all, the hand from the thread "Your bid.": ♠ 1098 ♥ K64 ♦ 5 ♣ AK10642 ♠ A6 ♥ AJ10 ♦ AKQ9764 ♣ 9 After partner opened 1♣ and RHO overcalled 1♠ you end up declaring 7♦. The lead is the ♠2, promising an odd number On the first trick, RHO inserts the Queen, which you skillfully take with the Ace. Thrumphs come down in three rounds, RHO discarding the ♥2 on the third round. Nothing exciting happens on the AK of ♣, and when you ruff the third round of clubs, RHO disacards the ♠4. Over to you.