jmcw

Without discussion I would expect. 4NT to be Keycard 5♥ seeking slam with a ♦ stop. North seemingly has different ideas, on 1 his judgement is awful, this is a PASS all day. North's 2♥ is a bit overbid IMO, and I don't much care for 5♥ either (3♥ for me). Can North have, xx AKxx A AKTxxx

Got it for Christmas. Good, but difficult read for me,....I have a lot to learn. So far, I'm rereading the first 100 pages or so, still trying to get my head around some of it. I might make it through the rest by the end of the year.

Count me in on the 3 card raise when unbalanced. Here, I would call 1NT (mostly for similar reasons as othes have posted)

Yes both are possible 1NT maximum openings, but in close decisions I prefer a 3rd card in the other major. With a 6 card major and only 2 in the other I'm planning 1M>>3M. with both. If partner has a dog I'm likely down, OTOH with dub support and a few points game should have a decent shot.

Clear 4♦. With pre-emptive hands I don't worry about keeping 3N in the picture.

2♥

X

At the table I would have X'd, but reading the comments and thinking it through gives me doubts. Easy to see how a X could work out badly, but, on balance I still think it right to bid. I would prefer a better suit to bid 2♥ and it runs the risk of losing the ♣ suit. With shortness in ♦ partner may well show ♥ with only 3 so X seems the most flexible call. X = 10 2♥ = 7 P = 6

I'm curious. Given this pattern what does a 2♣ need to be.

Hope you didn't think my follow up was nitpicking. FWIW, I find your comments insightful and very well written. It's also abundantly clear you know your stuff, so Ty for taking the time to reply, I very much appreciate.

It's the risk you take. Obviously there will be hands like that when just passing out 3♦ is best. If mine is a sub-par agreement, it's better than none. How do you handle it?

You got off light :rolleyes:

@Mikeh. So you X, partner bids ♣, can you ever untangle a playable ♠ contract or is it lost. 2254 come to mind, maybe even a less likely 3154 or 2164!

This seems right to me, especially the bit about the horses, but honestly I would bid 3♠ for fear that pulling 3NT would be showing something a bit different.

3♦ NF, the best of whats available. It has the considerable advantage of keeping the auction relatively low, does not exagerate my ♣ or ♠ holding, may even be our best spot. If Partner continues I'll be happy to but him in game in that strain.

Yes 4♣ is forcing. Certainly not the call I would make. I think standard would be. Pass = Forcing DBL = Neg Suit = Natural and Forcing 3NT = To Play (w/wo stopper on agreements) In my partnership 3NT = no stop

I invited my regular FTF partner to join the team league, happily he agreed. He made an interesting comment about online play. "My concentration is not as good". I confess, I had never given much consideration to this, but now that its come up I think perhaps I agree. Any thoughts?

I can provide my own partner if allowed. He is non poster.

IMO these are real benefits, not some obscure once a year occurances. I have noted several auctions over the past few months where I wished I had been playing Walsh. So far, I have never noted a time when I had wished I wasn't.

I'm interested

Hard to know what to lead when I don't understand the bidding. Was 2NT conventional?

I do not play NFB, and I'm a King short for X. Easy pass.

[hv=pc=n&s=saq6hqj52dj752c96&n=s7532hatd93cakjt8&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1cp1hp1sp1nppp]266|200[/hv] Matchpoints, lefty lead a low ♠, small, King go from there. Thanks

And where is the decimal point. I would have offered a simple raise on the previous round. The hand is worth that and no more.

Easier to consider what 4♠ is by having an agreement about a jump to 3♠. Agree the suit should be solid so a min of AKQJXXX, and no A or K outside AND no supporting honor in p suit. [hv=pc=n&n=sakqjt32hq5d7cjt9]133|100[/hv] Now change the red suits and you bid 3♠