maggieb

I dislike 3♣ the least. I consider 2♠ to be far more reasonable than 3♦.

I would bid 3♠ now, but that is mostly just a statement of how silly I think all my previous passes were.

So if you held that hand with the minors reversed you would pass?? Or is it that you think partner would pass if you rebid 4♣??? I know you like being weird for the sake of being weird, and generally it doesn't bother me. But sometimes it's nice to say something that will cause people to take your opinion seriously as well! The problem hand you mention is ♠Axxx ♥xxx ♦x ♣AQxxx? Yes. I would pass. Actually, I probably would open that hand, so I'd need a little less for my call. Maybe only the club Jack. Then, I'd definitely pass. Why do you think it is reasonable to be this pessimistic in this sort of auction? Even if partner doubles back in, you are in a worse position than if you had just doubled and shown your hand. If partner passes it out, it could be a disaster. Also I don't understand why you say you would open the hand, it is clearly not an opening bid in a modern 2/1 style. Maybe it is an opening bid in whatever system or style you like to play, but that's just not the question. Yes, passing could work; RHO could be heavy and this could be a misfit, but anyway, your opponents will have a hard time doubling you on this kind of auction when it is right. I would rather lose a few partscore battles than think myself unlucky whenever partner has a "perfecto" with 4 spades!

same

Why are people so surprised that there exist (lots!) of hands that would pass and then double? Is everyone here really saying they would sell out on a 4054 8-count? Why is it so bad to defend 4♥x? Sometimes we find a very good save, and sometimes partner has a heart stack and is more than happy to pass. These two things really outweigh the probability of going for a number.

I think I underestimated the probability of slam originally, and thinking about it more, 3♥ must be right. But I still think penalty passing with this hand is awful, I would have bid 2N.

Pass, why did I bid 4♦? I don't have anything resembling a second suit in diamonds.

Partner expressed interest in competing to the 5-level, and my hand is definitely good for that. I would bid 5♠.

I would bid 5♣, expecting it to make or be a good save very often. The frequency of both contracts going down is small enough to make pass a clear long-term loser to me. It seems like if partner has scattered values in her three suits, then pulling is about an even proposition, but if she has concentrated minor values or five clubs, it is a big winner. There is also a chance that the opponents will not judge correctly if I bid, while they have no decision if I pass.

Matchpoints Both Vulnerable ♠ Q98 ♥ xx ♦ 98xxx ♣ xxx (2♥) - x - (4♥) - P (P) - x - (P) - ?

A problem with opening 2♣ on the first hand is that your sequence is very likely to go 2♣, 2♠, 3♥, 4♥. If you routinely upgrade hands into the "too strong for the 1 level" category for fear of a passout, your slam bidding will suffer a lot on hands where you actually do have a strong 2 level opener. To me, that is just not worth the risk of missing a very small number of games by opening 1♠. Your hand also becomes a nightmare to describe after a preempt. I agree with everyone that opening 2♣ on the second hand is not in the ballpark.

Hi, At IMP scoring (NV all), you hold: ♠x ♥AKQxxx ♦xx ♣KJTx And the bidding goes (you deal): 1♥ 1♠ 2♥ 3♥ 4♥ 4♠ P P ? Would you bid again?

I think this problem is interesting, since there are a lot of possible hands where partner might bid like this. 1) 3451, very strong (18-19). 2) 3451, intermediate strength (15-17). 3) 4+ hearts, 18-19 balanced 4) 4+ hearts, 15-17 balanced ...etc I would never interpret this as RKC. With 4♠ as a strong club raise, I don't see any reason to sacrifice a very useful bid in exchange for the occasional hand where I really just want to know how many keycards partner has. Anyway, I have no idea what this should show (sorry!). With my regular partners, I would be inclined to play this as natural and strong. On the actual hand I make a noncommital double to see what information that fetches me (I would love to raise 3NT to 4NT). Over partner's dreaded 4♣, I think I would just go low with 4♥.

I agree that diamonds is very likely to be our best strain, but do you think this is enough? This hand is deceptively strong, and 5♦ is a very good contract opposite a lot of 5-5 minimums. For example, partner will never move with ♠Axxxx ♥x ♦KQxxx ♣Ax (I know this is a little contrived, but I'm sure you understand my point).