maggieb

If you don't have any discussion, then this is just natural and forcing. I don't do that though, since in all my partnerships I play 2♦ is GF and feel it's fine to just start that way. I like to play that 2♠ here is GF and asking: 2N = min, 3C asks shortness 3C = max, balanced 3D/3H/3S = max, shortness 3N = non-min 2227 Risks some wrongsiding, but I think it's worth it.

Presumably this means that you are willing to play 3N opposite any hand with a heart stopper, since if you bid 3♥ and pull it's forcing. Sorry, I don't get this.

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=saxhjt7xxxdqckjxx]133|100|[/hv] You deal r/w: 1♥ - (P) - 1♠ - (2♦) ?

I'm assuming we aren't playing lebensohl, or else this isn't really a problem. I would try 4♣. This could work out really poorly but it's good for our hand that partner decided not to bid a natural 2N despite holding 4 hearts (it seems). This means he is more likely to have minimal heart waste and/or 5 clubs, both of which are good; of course he could just have a terrible hand, in which case this is going to work out badly, but the opponents are a passed hand opposite a preempt, so I doubt they can double me. If we were NV I would pass.

3♣ (strong diamond raise). Partner's double suggests penalty. Partner shouldn't have a hand that's 12-14 balanced, so he's either reasonably strong and unbalanced (if he is, his shortness is likely in spades) or 18-19 balanced. Both of these things are good, so we will probably end up getting to slam, but I would start with 3♣ just to see what happens.

Josh (Justin?) why would you waste 3N as shortness ask when the only shortness can be clubs? Non-serious seems like a much better use. Otherwise I agree. I'm not enamored with the idea, but I thought I'd bring it up for input. I play this as an ask, not a shortness ask. 4♣ = club shortness 4♦ = 18-19 bal, good diamonds 4♥ = heart shortness 4♠ = 18-19 bal, bad diamonds And you might ask me why I wouldn't just bid 3♥/4♥ with shortness. I guess I'm a little weird, but I have my own reasons.

Well I was worried about going for 50 against nothing. Why? You have nothing in spades, nothing in hearts, and slow tricks in clubs (very likely not RHO's second suit). You have something like 1.5 defensive tricks as an opening bidder opposite someone who just said he had a good preempt with 4 card support for your defensively useless major. I really doubt they aren't making something.

4♠, they can do whatever they want after that.

Also I want to add that a lot of the time when partner is 3343 he can pass anyway, which may also turn out fine.

Double. Josh I think you are being way too conservative. If partner has a 4 card major we will come out on top most of the time, if he doesn't but he has 5 diamonds I would also expect to beat them, so we are really worried about partner being 3343 or maybe 3334, but if he's 3334 maybe they will bid overcompete anyway. All in all double just seems totally normal/obvious/wtp to me, and I would be hugely surprised if it was a long term loser.

Mixed strategies only work when two of your strategies aren't completely terrible.

A club flit is not implied, but it is frequently the case that you have one. This is true whether or not you are a passed hand. 2N seems like a fine bid to me.

This is a great hand to be playing this system on, so I think I will use it to my advantage and bid 4♥ right away.

straube I mostly agree with karlson. Also to point out an example of what I think is a redundancy: 1N-2♣ 2♥-3♣ "..........3C-puppets to 3D to show 4 spades and unspecified shortness" What kind of hand would bid this way? It seems you have a bid for every shape that has 4 spades and some shortness. Also when you type something like 4-2-1-6, do you mean either minor? Because maybe I am just missing something, but I don't see how you show diamonds.

IMO this is by far the biggest (and basically, the only real reason) someone should/would consider playing this. Also responder can frequently take a good guess at which suit the shortness is at, so this convention can be good even for game bidding. I wouldn't play this just because I'm the forgetful type and this isn't a really common auction, but overall I think it's fine/good (unless I'm missing something) if you think you can remember. Also I just want to add that if you fail to alert, some LHOs can cause you a lot of problems, claiming that he would've led (whatever is the most successful lead on this particular hand) had you alerted correctly.

I think you are losing too much by not being able to bid garbage stayman with 5♥+4♠. I'm interested in what your 3m continuations are over 1N-2♣ 2♦-? which you have sacrificed your natural 3m bids for.

Whenever partner is missing the ♥A you can be in serious trouble (they lead a spade and hold up from ♥Axxx).

I think South's 4♥ bid just shows a lack of judgment, if he was so worried about spades he could just bid 6N, which I bet makes (much) more often than not. That said, north's reasons for not starting with 1♦ are not really sensible to me, and I think his bidding is worse, since it indicates a lack of understanding of basic bridge rather than just a lack of judgment. He has a hand which is good for slam in hearts, diamonds, or clubs, which is not over-strength for a 1♦ opener, which can continue with a normal 3♣ JS after a 1♠ response, etc. I agree that North should bid again over 4♥ having started this way, but it's very close to me, and maybe I am really wrong about this. Construct a hand for me where 6♥ is good contract, but partner will sign off in 5♥ over 4♠.

I think double is fine.

How about w/w MPs? I guess I pass but I don't feel strongly about it.

Unless I'm misreading something, this seems like a fine game to me.

You may be right, regarding 3♥/4♥ and missing games. But I think there is a fair tactical upside to 4♥, as there seems to be a reasonable chance the overcaller has a good hand with spades and clubs. Sure, but he didn't bid Michaels, so he probably has at most 4 clubs. Unless his partner has 6, I'd say that any number of clubs they bid is likely to be bad for them, especially since I wasn't even particularly convinced I could make 3♥ or 4♥. Consequently I considered the "avoiding a club save" factor to be more or less a wash.

3♥ seems right, I have a hard time believing that we will miss too many games by bidding 3♥. On the hands where 3♥ is already down, bidding 4♥ risks going for a digit. I also don't think 4♥ has a great tactical upside to it, so overall I think it's just an overbid. 2♥ is just nonsense though.

This is a huge myth, I don't know why non-expert players think this is true (my feeling is that this used to be more popular back in the day). There are only a couple ways this can gain and two huge, very likely ways it can lose (sacrifice a tempo, and more importantly solve all of declarer's diamond problems). This is not the kind of auction where you're worried at all that they might make 7 if you don't take the ♦A anyway, you should be trying to set up a black suit trick before they can knock out your ♦A or at the very least just not give anything away. I would lead a club, I think it's safer than a spade.

Peggy showed me an interesting play problem at the club yesterday. [hv=d=s&v=n&n=s8hk632dkq973cq54&s=skt653hqj8d85ca83]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] P - (P) - 1♦ - (1♠) 2N - AP Do you agree with 2NT? Probably not, but anyway, you have to play it now on the ♠Q lead while RHO follows with the ♠2 (UDCA). Continuations: If you win and play a diamond, the ♦K will hold as RHO plays the ♦T. If you play a heart back to your ♥Q, that will also hold. If you duck at T1, LHO will continue with the ♠7 and RHO will win the ♠A and switch to a low heart, and your ♥Q out of hand holds. Edit: Added more information.