fromageGB

We play transfers in many situations, ie "Ruben responses" as well as Ruben advances. The agreement is that in all cases either we transfer through NT (♠>NT, NT>♣, ♣>♦) or round NT (♠>♣, NT=NT, ♣>♦) depending on which of the opponents has shown more strength, ie put the opener on lead rather than the responder, or the overcaller on lead rather than the advancer. So it is correct to transfer into NT if the person on your right is the stronger of the opponents.

Why might one be forced to use 4NT RKCB? 4NT B (without the RKC would be better).

On the contrary, as opening 1NT is bad for natural systems. Playing matchpoints it is vital to get to the major part-scores when there are any, and only then if not, play in NT. If you open 1NT, partner is pre-empted and will not be able to speak unless he is at least invitational. Conversely, opening a minor enables a weakish partner to speak, and then you can play in a major. Playing matchpoints you want to open 1♣ more often, so if you have a 3-point NT range, up/downgrade out of it as much as you can. Better to adopt a 2-point range, such as 15/16, and then when you are forced to open 1NT and partner has a 7/8 count he can try for a major fit, and if there is not one, subside in 2NT to play. Of course internationals play IMPs where such nuances are lost, and at this scoring part-score differences of 10 can be ignored. Different game; different methods.

Another caveat is that the law's "safety guarantee" depends on the total lengths of your and your opponents' suits. You may well have bidding understanding such that you know your own minimum length, but you have to make an assumption that the opponent's bidding is sound. This is not always the case. For example, opponents open spades, partner overcalls hearts, responder supports with 2♠ and you are confident of an 8 card fit and about a combined 20 count. The law supports your bid to 3♥. One off is a good sacrifice? No it is not ; they have bid on a 4-2 fit. And no, they are not beginners, merely incompetent. Your negative score is a matchpoint bottom. This has happened to me, and also similarly at a higher level. Nevertheless, the law is a good guide.

I think the answers have already been given, but an additional factor is consideration of the most suitable contract. For example, your quoted 16 point hand (and I'm deliberately not giving it "good spots") of AK53, KQ64, A87, 92 with two 4-card majors, is a hand I would rather play in 2M than 1NT. The values are "suit-suitable" rather than "NT suitable". If you open 1NT 14-16, and partner is 6-8 count, you are likely to play there. But if you open 1♣ (or 1♦ if that is your taste) then there is a reasonable chance that you will play in 2♥ or 2♠. Without the majors you would be happy to open 1NT with no upgrade. With both majors I would upgrade.

I'm happy with the 2♣ response. I'm happy with responder's 2M and 3♣ rebids, but I am not sure the rest of if warrants the "natural bidding" forum! If you want a reference thread for three-way 2♣ response to 1M, let's include the simple natural method anyone without an umpteen TB memory can play. 1M 2♣ = (a) natural 5+ GF, or (b) 11+ 3 card support for M, or (.c) no support, no 5 card suit 16+ if playing forcing NT {<16 starts 1NT}, or 13+ if playing non-forcing, Opener 2oM = 5 card any strength, 3m = 5 card strong only, otherwise 2♦ relay. 1M 2♣ 2♦ : 2M = 11/12 invititational 3 card support 2oM = 4 card natural (may still have 3 card M support as well) 2NT = balanced 3♣ = natural 5+ GF 3M = 3 card support GF

1♣ 1NT 2♣ 1♣ 2NT 3♣ For both of these, do not pass. It seems you may be losing 5 or 6 tricks in hearts. 1♦ 1NT 2♣ is very misleading as to the lengths of the suits. The only real problem with opening 1♣ occurs when you are playing weak jump responses in hearts, but then you probably won't be.

1♠ ♥K rather than the 8. Must have a good chance of 9 tricks in my own hand.

Either you are playing 2♥ = good raise with 3 spades, or you are not. If you are, it's obvious. If not, I prefer 2♠ to X, as it may be awkward or too late otherwise to show them later.

3NT = balanced <14 with doubleton heart. 2NT = unbalanced <14 or any 17+ with nothing better to say.

1♠ (pass) ? I am not sure what "semi-forcing" means. If it means forcing then not forcing on alternate hands, then if this is the time it is forcing, by all means bid 1NT and rebid hearts. If this is the time it is not forcing, then I would hate to play in 1NT when spades is much better, so I would pass. If it means partner passes 1NT when she is a minimum-ish opener, then again I think pass might be better.

I would endorse Zel's post, and suggest you bid the lower of two 4-card suits, and 1♣ when 4333, so that 1♠ is ALWAYS a 5-card suit. This makes it much easier for responder, and for finding the right contract. Then, when your partnership is more confident at a future time, switch to making hearts always 5-card as well, and play a 5-card major Acol. You'd be surprised how easy it is to respond if you know opener's major is 5-card. To clarify, until you are playing 5-card majors, open 1♣ on any {4333} when not in the range of your 1NT open, regardless of what the 4 card suit is, but open 1♥ if you are 3433 and your partner would bid diamonds if he has hearts as well in a weak hand : 1♣ 1♦ 1♥ would imply at least 4 clubs, so on a 3433 you would rebid 1NT and miss a 4-4 heart fit. If in range of your 1NT, of course a {4333} hand should open 1NT.

Well, not my system either, but I would assume 2♥ is 6-10 and 4 hearts (or equivalent with shortage) therefore on the principle that a 23 point 9 card fit is worth bidding game, with my excellent 14 it is certainly worth a try. The actual form of a try depends on trial agreements, but I like a "nothing" try, either no values or a short suit, with 2♠ (2M+1) if I have scattered values, so 3♣ from me. Partner should be able to judge.

The reason not to bid 4♥ is not that it went for a big penalty, but that it probably will help them in deciding which telephone number they want.

No, the reason is not that it takes less space, but that it agrees trumps, and sets a game force. From here on anything you do is geared to finding the correct level (4, 5, 6, or 7), not the denomination. It makes the bidding more efficient. It takes less bidding space, but that space should be put to good use. Most treatments of continuations have a minimumish opener rebidding 4M, and this destroys all space when responder has a good enough hand, as in your example here, but I prefer the weaker opener to rebid 3♣. Many responder hands will then signoff, but 3♦ can ask for a shortage. The vitally important thing is to discuss and agree it with your partner, but any version you play will be better than none.

Further to the above, you are indeed safe in the slam if north's heart cue was based on a shortage. Depending on your 2NT agreements you could find this out before cue bidding.

Yes, yes, and yes. The bidding with cue bids? Looks like you need another convention, an immediate response which shows game forcing 4 card spade support. Most people play a version of "Jacoby 2NT". Start with 1♠ 2NT and then you know what suit you will end up in, and at least in game, but the continuations after 2NT need careful agreement. As North, I would rebid a cheap 3♣ to show a minimum 12-14 hand with no void but possibly with any suit singleton. Sadly, I don't think simple cue bidding and ace asking will work here. South could cue with 4♣ then ... With hog's first hand, north cannot cue a red suit, so bids 4♠, which south passes. So OK on this one. With hog's second hand, he can cue bid 4♥. Now you could use common RKCB with 4NT asking, but the response of 5♥ = "2 aces with the ♠Q" is no good to you. Opener could have a low doubleton club and you lose the first 2 tricks. You don't find the slam this way. So you might add another convention, using 3NT (agreed as "not to play" when you have agreed a major) here to ask north to start cue bidding. North bids 4♣ with both hands. South continues by cue bidding 4♦. With hog's first hand, he can't cue 4♥ so bids 4♠ which south passes. Again OK. With hog's second hand, he cues 4♥ and south continues with ace asking to hear 5♥ = "2 aces with the ♠Q". South reasons as follows. There is an ace missing. If the ace of clubs is missing, north must have a shortage for the club cue, so clubs are safe from the lead. If the ace of hearts is missing, he will have the king of hearts for his cue, so you will lose a heart but are safe from the lead. So you could bid 6♠. This is an example showing the use of cue bids, but it is not a perfect slam bid this way, because if the trump ace is missing, you are at risk on a heart lead and continuation after the first round of trumps. You may not decide to bid the slam because of this, and stop in 5♠ when opener does not have 3 aces. However, on these methods, it is better than 50-50.

I am in the UK and prefer not to play a penalty double against the common weak NT, at matchpoints. Yes, it is vulnerable to being thrashed, but as helene_t correctly pointed out, it also allows them to play in a 2m contract that they could not otherwise reach, or find a playable 4-4 or 4-3 fit. The size of the penalty is immaterial. Winning +800 once in a blue moon is not as good as the more frequent small gains you may get for some other use of the call, such as -50 for a natural 2♣ compared with a -90 for passing out (if 2♣ would otherwise be conventional). Of course at IMPs the fairly rare 800 is worth a lot more than a more frequent 40. Here, as in many instances, different methods and treatments come to the fore. A further point worth remembering is that if you pass with a balanced 17, not only will they not be able to escape, but they will sometimes get fewer tricks than normal because the expectation of eg "one out of two finesses is 75%" falls down when you have all the undisclosed strength. +100 or +200 may be worth almost as many matchpoints as a successful penalty double.

Don't forget that knowing conventions that you never use has benefits in understanding the implications of opposition hands when they make those bids, or equally DON'T make those bids but use other ones. Although treatments and details may vary with the partnership, it helps to understand the general principles. For example, when someone opens an unalerted 1M, if you see on his card "weak 2 bids may be 5 card" and Ekren, you know that it is likely to be a better hand than you might have had for that bid, if you play Benjamin. Inferences like this can help in the defence.

I would have thought that if 2♣ can be anything other than purely natural, you need to have 2♦ as a relay to find out what sort of hand responder has. If there are any agreed exceptions, then they need to be GF and very descriptive. Short of such agreement, opener with clubs can always bid them later if he wants to. My follow-ups are very simple : 1M 2♣ 2♦ : 2M = 3 card support invitational 2 other Major = 4 card suit 2NT = balanced without a major (if xx{5x} will be a bad 5 card minor) 3♣ = natural GF 3M = GF 3 card support The strength of my responder 2NT and other major is 16+, but you could play 13+ if 1NT is not forcing. Edit: your 3-suited opener hand would bid 2♦ then if responder did not bid 2♥ but 2NT, rebid 3♣.

5 hearts. If partner has a hand with 4 hearts he can bid 2♥ over 2♦.

Really? If you are supposed to put your phone in sight to show you are not cheating with it, why not have 2 phones? If you have two transparent boxes to cater for that, then I am sure I can wear trousers with big enough pockets for 3 phones... No, the only answer is to play in the nude.

If you thought your dinner was explaining a bridge convention you surely were drinking too much wine. But for a simple one, I much prefer (at matchpoints) X for both majors and the rest natural, with penalty X at IMPs and 2♣ for the majors.

What the replies so far are missing is that by having a large number of conventions available to you (and listed on your online card) you are able to play effectively with more partners. MGoetze is correct when he says "as many as you can remember". This does not mean that you would play them by choice, or with a preferred partner, just that if a pick-up plays that way you will know what he is doing. Have Crowhurst, New Minor Forcing , and XYZ on your card. Nobody will expect you to play them simultaneously :rolleyes: but it allows a new partner to be able to say "OK, xyz."

Yes you might make 3NT when they have 9 or 8 tricks in spades, but surely you cannot have any cause for thinking that they have no entry which's absence will allow you to make your contract. If you have ♠AK or AQ then they will likely have more than one entry. Minors, or possibly one minor plus heart tolerance. Your failure to bid 3NT over 3♠ makes it clear-cut. (1♠) X (3♠) 3NT I would take as natural without any agreement.