OleBerg

If it was somehow forbidden for me to lead a heart, I'd lead the ♣J.

The actual hand was: ♠Q6532 ♥A1096542 ♦2 ♣- So you were right. Fromage, beer is on you if it goes wrong, as you hold: ♠KJ9 ♥7 ♦A652 ♣K8632 4♠X makes , even with spades 4-1, and as the♣K gets hooked, 3nt is a winner too.

My agreement with partner is that double shows a constructive hand that believed 4♥ was a winner. Naturally partner will often pass. If he does, I lead the ♥A too.

I agree with 2♣. Now I bid 5♣. Because of the 2♣ bid, partner will know I have a hand with few HCP, but a lot of playing strenght.

I often use that tactic myself, though not intentionally.

Jumps to 4♣, 5-5 in the soft suits. I'm only -200 I guess. Now partner has the option giving the opponents a speeding-ticket, if they bid 4♠.

Which also allows 4♣ to show a void, removing much ambiguety.

Pass-(1♣)-pass-(1♦) 1♥-(1NT)-pass-(3NT) 4♣-(X)-pass-(pass) XX-(pass)-4♦-(X) XX? What does partner hold? And what if he had bid 4♥ instead of the second XX? The actual hand will be posted later. Feel free to joke, but plz be nice and make a serious reply too. Edit: All white, IMP's. (As if it matters.)

Sounds about right.

1) Double. (Unless I am in a forcing situation.) 2) 5♥. It's called a take.out double, because partner wants you to take out.

Definately. Partner needs nothing but the ♠A10xxx for the slam to be good. Even 7♠ might still be on, though not likely. I will choose an option that allows me to invite slam.

15 years ago it had quite a following in Denmark. Now only a small minority of top-level players use it. (And a few below top-level.) In an uncontested auction, any well organized system will do fine with ordinary RKC. It's when the auction becomes highly competitive, that the idée shows its worth, as you can use the 5-level to check both aces and controls. The convention can be improved by Streamlining it, switching the meaning of 4nt and the bid directly above 4 in the agreed trumphsuit. If you adopt this, be prepared for some silly mistakes during practice. (And a lot of practice.)

That's a bold assertion. Europe contains about 45 countries, including, for example, Italy, France, the Netherlands, the UK, Sweden and Poland. Is 2NT forcing in all of these places? Right, to bold. Still I'd expect it to be forcing in almost all of Europe. Is it forcing in 2/1?

Hi all, I am not accustomed to play 2/1, but I'd still expect 2nt to be forcing? (It is in Europe.) If it is, it's an excellent bid. Now partner can show his exstra club length, without focusing on a heart stopper. This might prompt north to bid 4nt, which south may raise.

"In competition, a useful rule is that a weak passed hand (0-7) should not act unforced at it's first opportunity. This is to help clarify when a passed hand is showing a sound hand (remember most of your marginal hands opened already!)." Usefull for avoiding sily disasters, but troublesome, especially when partner has 12+, as you might be to easily preempted, even by a 1♦ bid. And if advancer raises to 2♦ you are in dire trouble. I would recommend that the 0-7 hand can make some bids under its own steam. For ½ a year I played a system that looked somewhat like it: Pass was 0-8 or 16+, and as replies, partners 1♣ was 0-8 or 16+. Our rule was, that in competitive sequences we simply bid our hand, any two-way hand simply assumed partner could tell whether it was weak or strong. We didn't have any misunderstanding for that ½ year. (Or rather we had one, where my partner didn't bid his 0-8 enough, for fear of showing 16+. that broke the partnership.) It seems obvious, that this agreement will have a better chance of working in our system, than in yours. Still, if you want to play the system, I recommend that you try it out. To me it would seem silly, not to be able to support partner, when he opens one of a major in third seat.

?? :) I thought I had a lot of experience with screens, but I have never heard about that one before. To indicate a passed out, the players remove their previous bids and return the tray with the empty slots for the other side to see. Or simply place the final passes, but this is rarely done in practice. South is not to blame here. If N/E can't see the bidding, N just pulls the tray closer. This happens all the time. Many players never push the tray through but always leave it up to partner to pull it the last way. That way you avoid hitting partner's cup of coffee on the other side of the screen :D. Well, once or twice each season I try it the other way around: Partner deliberately goes for my cop of coffea. This is normally followed by me declaring 3nt-4, while my partner could have made 3 of a minor.

Imps, red vs white. 1♥-(P)-2♥-(X) XX-(P)-3♣? 5-card major. What do you expect partner to hold, if he is: 1) "Expert" on BBO? 2) A reasonable player? 3) An expert?

As I see it, the problem with RKC isn't getting into a bad slam, it's not getting into a good one. If we're not off two keycards, partner must have something resembling a trick outside his AKQxx of spades. He did bid 4 hearts. The problem is, if partner has something like AKJxxx in spades, and something resmbling a trick. I'd go for the keycard anyway, as partner will sometimes bid AKJxxx as if he had the queen. The alternative could be 5♠ if it asked partner to raise only with solid thrumps. I wouldn't dare bid it without a specific agreement. An aside: Is it obvious that 4♣ is a splinter? Why is it not just a cue? What do you bid with a hand that is simply to god for a direct 4♠? And what would 4♥ have been? With respect to the last questions, with a hand too good for 4♠, I'd bid 3♠, inviting partner to cue. In my regular partnerships, 4♥ would be a splinter as well. As for what's obvious in a pick-up partnership...hard to say, but I would have taken 4♣ as a splinter. One of the "treatment" discussions I try to have with pickup partners is that bidding one level higher than a natural, forcing bid in a suit is a splinter. 3♣ and 3♥ are natural and forcing, so 4♣ and 4♥ are splinters. 3♠ is stronger than 4♠ on general principles. Didn't consider that 3♠ wuld be forcing in 2/1. Now I know, thx.

As I see it, the problem with RKC isn't getting into a bad slam, it's not getting into a good one. If we're not off two keycards, partner must have something resembling a trick outside his AKQxx of spades. He did bid 4 hearts. The problem is, if partner has something like AKJxxx in spades, and something resmbling a trick. I'd go for the keycard anyway, as partner will sometimes bid AKJxxx as if he had the queen. The alternative could be 5♠ if it asked partner to raise only with solid thrumps. I wouldn't dare bid it without a specific agreement. An aside: Is it obvious that 4♣ is a splinter? Why is it not just a cue? What do you bid with a hand that is simply to god for a direct 4♠? And what would 4♥ have been?

That partner might think your double is take-out. Of course, if you make a "CRACKITY CRACK CRACK"-double, that wont be a problem.

♠ Kxx ♥ AK10x ♦ xx ♣ QJxx Just a hunch. :)

What would 3♠ show? 3♠ would be forcing, a much HCP-stronger one-suited hand, that might envision slam facing the right values, and that wanted to set up a force. Such a hand cannot start with a double in my system, as a T/O double followed by a bid in a suit, shows tolerance for the other suits. I know this makes more sense when partner is not passed, but we play it as a general agreement. I am not a stern follower of fast arrival, but I prefer it here.

I know, I have have often been told so, after one of my overbids. Nonetheless, say you have: ♠KQJ10xxx ♥x ♦xx ♣AQx On such a hand I would like to be able to gamble on 4♠, and would be genuinely afraid of 2♠ being passed out, on a lot of hands where 4♠ make. Even when 4♠ doesn't make, the opponents might make a phantom. Well, this depends on what hands your opponents pass away in first seat, and how creative they can be with their third hand preempts. I prefer to set up my own forces, when I have room for it, instead of letting my opponents bidding put us in a forcing situation. In this specific sequence, I wouldn't mind the pass being forcing at all, but it requires a lot of specific agreements, as I wouldn't like it to be forcing, if LHO wasn't a passed hand. And there are sequences where I wouldn't want a pass to be forcing, even after a passed hand raises a preempt. So Ill agree this far; if my partner was able to remember everything, I wouldn't mind playing this sequence as forcing. I think I would actually prefer it.

If opener can have 13 or less, I treat it as weak. A somewhat simple agreement I use for pick-up partnerships. As Echognome writes, the lower ranges are much more likely, hence the lower range define the type. In my regular partnership all doubles are penalty. Probably not the best, but not a big worry.

My experience with relay-systems is somewhat limited, 2½ years of steady play, then some on and off play. The idée with 4♦ appeals a lot to me, but I think I would prefer step 2-5 to be slaminvitational with the same rules for suits.