mich-b

I would show 5-5 minors (3♦ or whatever your system calls for) , and if pd bids 3♠ (values there) bid 3NT, and if he bid 3♥, will play 5 minor.

Assuming this is a Forcing Pass situation for you (I think it should be) , Opener doubles when his hand has some (most) of the following : 1. Has values in ♠s. 2. Short in ♥s. 3. Overall minimum. 4. No extreme shape with the minors. Generally a double here suggests that opener believes responder should not be bidding again. Opener might prefer bidding when he is 6-5 in the minors , or a 7 card ♦ suit. Also , he has the option of Passing , and pulling partner's double , showing still a lot of shape , and a better hand. Responder's double is his default action with no special shape. He should expect to play 4♠X unless opener was planning a "pass and pull". This should be ok , since neither opener nor responder have good shape for bidding more. If opener doubled responder will often leave it in, but he may bid again with either : 1. An undisclosed fit for opener's minor. 2. Good hand with long, solid ♥s. 3. Some other hands with excellent shape.

I meant to suggest that it is wrong to bid 4♥ and later pass with a hand as good as this. With the original hand I feel happy bidding 4♥ and doubling 4♠ later if necessary. With same shape but less defense - 4♥ then pass. With same strength but less shape (only 6 ♥ instead of 7?) - 2♥ then Pass.

I like 4♥. I will double if it comes back to me in 4♠, because my defense is better than expected. If I wasn't willing to double on the 2nd round , I think I should not start with 4♥.

I would guess that in most other tables it didnt go 1S -P -P -? If LHO had 19 , and RHO 0 , your pd had 15. Perhaps in many other tables your pd's hand found a call with the 15 count?

Pass. I am long in their suit and weak. Bidding would often result in going down in some high contract. You mean -80 wasn't a good score for us? Well , my guess is that happened either because RHO passed with a hand others responded with and got too high , or because pd preferred to Pass when others made a "modern"/imperfect takeout double.

Strong enough for me to raise? (If I showed a bad hand so far than probably I should..)

My ♦ holding is great for accepting the invite, the rest of my hand is bad. Luckily , I have an in-between bid of 3♥ showing I have doubts. If he only bids 3♠ now , I will pass that.

It is important to realize there are two separate issues here: 1. From which suit should I lead ? This is a complex issue , and of course the "right" answer is usually to try and listen closely to the bidding and figure out which suit is their "weak spot". There are some general "rules of thumb" tested by time , like leading a long and strong suit against NT , or leading trumps when the opps are about to crossruff. Sometimes looking at the particular holdings in various suits in your hand may provide a good clue : A singleton often works well against their suit contract , a KQJ sequence is very often a good lead whatever the bidding etc... Of course there is much more to it than this - many books have been written about this subject. 2. Once I have decided on a suit - which card should I lead ? This is a more "technical" issue , which usually calls for afreements with pd , rather than judgement. Some pairs agree to lead 3rd/5th , some lead 4th best. Some pairs lead top of two touching honours , some the bottom card (Rusinow). The idea here , is try to select an agreement that will enable leader's pd to "read" the holding better most often. No agreement will be easy to read always. So while some agreements may be marginally better (make it easier for pd to read more often) , imo it doesnt matter that much. Just make a set of agreements and follow them.

easy 2♦ imo. If pd happens to have a very fitting 15 , and 3NT is makeable, so be it...

I think defending looks more promissing. All the values I have work only in defense , and while we won't make game , and likely not even 3M (and who says I guess to bid the right one?) pd who bid so much is likely to provide at least 3 tricks , especially considering that I am short in his main suit.

Our requirements for Namyats are rather flexible , we don't require a solid suit and we don't deny a void. Our typical Namyats hand will have 8-8.5 tricks , a good suit (not necessarily solid) , and about one defensive trick outside the long suit , which brings the typical hcp count to about 11-14. AKQxxxx + outside Ace is typical, but variations like AKxxxxx x x Axxx or KQxxxxxx x x AQx are ok.

We play 2NT here as Scrambling , suggesting doubler should choose between Clubs and Diamonds. In that context , converting 3♣ to 3♦ does not make sense, so if we didnt discuss this sequence I would assume pd meant 2NT as Lebensohl (or Good/Bad) and wants to show a weak hand with ♦.

Whatever each partner may think about the early rounds of bidding , once North has Key-Carded , and found out there are not 2 aces missing it is his responsibility to bid slam. If he still isn't sure - he should not have bid 4NT. Bidding 4NT and signing off when there are enough aces is a poor approach.

I would pass (and would also pass on the 2nd round even if not playing FNJ).

I would assume it shows ♥s. It is possible to play transfer responses (perhaps including XX) after their DBL , but imo this is outside the scope of T-Walsh and requires separate agreement.

I heard this before , and I dont particularly "buy" it. People might lead an ace against a small slam for a large variety of reasons (like hoping to cash 2 quick tricks in that suit) , only one of which is holding a potential trump trick (Or even without a good reason - just because they remember being told cashing an Ace is often good against small slams) . While it may be an indication to the leader holding the trump queen , I don't think this indication is strong.

That is also what we do.

I think you should have bid again over 4♥. 4♥ rebid should show a very good ♥ suit , and a hand close to opening 2♣. A typical hand might be 7 solid hearts + a black Ace + another nice card OR 8 solid + a black Ace.

Maybe he does have great clubs , and expects a juicy penalty from 2♣ doubled? Surely he can't get that penalty by bidding 2NT... Isn't it common (at least without specific agreement to the contrary) that all doubles after opps run from a penalty double (of 1NT or otherwise) are for penalties?

Opener should break the transfer (bid something other than 2♦) with any hand that would bid anything (rather than pass) over a natural, non-forcing 2♦.

The person responsible for teaching bridge in schools in Israel is (if I am not mistaken) Oryah Meir oryah@bezeqint.net You can try emailing her and asking for the material you need.

(While I don't necessarily agree with the bidding up to that point) When North bids 5NT asking for Kings , South should bid 7 , since he has a source of tricks , that will provide as many as needed.

We play Double here as a strong hand without a clear direction , denying 3♠s. Typically 2254, but some other shapes possible like 1354 , 2263 etc..

minors.