mich-b

5♦. If they bid only 3♠ , I think 4♦ is enough. If (over RHO 4♠) my minors were 6-3 , I would try 4NT offering choice between 5♣ and 5♦.

I am curious : Can the OP tell us what whoever thought this is not a WKNT opening, considered to be the problem with 1NT?

I define 1♣ 1♦ 3NT as showing about a King stronger than this hand. For me this hand is a 3♣ bid, with the 7th ♣ compensating for being somewhat light in high cards. I think that reserving 3NT for hands stronger than this , not only avoids going down when partner is weak, but also makes it easier for responder to investigate slam when he has a good hand.

I have been in favour of allowing these bids for quite some time. Since it is perfectly within the spirit of the game to save against opponents' slam or grand slam , expecting to go down a lot, but still gaining IMPs, why would it be against the spirit of the game to be able to judge that while the opps are making 7S , we can make 10 tricks in Diamonds? Why wouldn't we like to reward this judgement?

Some advantages of the Multi : 1. (Obvious) Frees 2M opening for something else - we play 5-5 M-m. 2. Allows you (if you design your responses accordingly) to play 4-of-a-major declared by the strong hand. This has proven (for me) to be a big advantage , often overlooked by supporters of natural 2M openings. 3. You usually (not always) will be able to play 2M with the long suit in dummy , and the unknown hand hidden , which makes it much more difficult to defend. 4.Sometimes, when you may have been going for number if partner had opened 2M, you can escape by passing 2♦. The Multi also has drawbacks , the biggest of which , for me , is the ability of the opps to overcall 2♥ , when we open a Multi with ♠s. Other drawbacks are : Being unable to bid to the 4 level quickly, unless you have a fit for both majors. Having to guess which major to lead , when the Multi opener didnt get a chance to clarify which is his suit. I can not say which is better, but I think advantage (2) above should not be dismissed lightly.

3C , since you have a Club suit - not a balanced hand. If partner needs my stopper to play 3NT he can still ask for it.

5D. This is my best effort to describe hand with a lot of playing strength in Diamonds and extreme shape.

I like 2NT now , showing long ♣s , and also length in ♦, so partner can appreciate the degree of fit. But , I strongly disagree with the pass on the previous round. I dont believe in Passing partner's opening NV Vs VUL , with any hand with shape.

1H on the first round - because I have a good Heart suit. 2S on the second round , because I have support. What am I missing?

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=s7h642dk84cat8632]133|100|Scoring: MP 1♦-(1♥)-?[/hv] Playing 2/1 , 1♦ can be 3 only with 44Majors, otherwise 4+. What is your choice ? And specifically what do you think about 2♦?

small ♣. I dont like leading a trump from a singleton, and QTxx is often a nice combination. I prefer the ♣ and not the ♥ , because partner might have overcalled 3♥ , but could not overcall 3♣ - though of course this is only a very small clue.

Double. I would consider 1H over 1D though , since there is more chance I will get a second bid (likely double) on a low level.

I would like to ask how everybody plays this : 1♥ - 2NT (minors) - 3♦ (3♦ is agreed to be showing a good hand with ♠, 3♠ would be non-forcing). So do you play 3♦ as GF , and 3♠ as about 9-11? Or 3♦ is 9+ , and 3♠ about 6-8? Also ,does it change if we have the minors , and they the majors 1♣ - 2♦ (majors) - 2♠ (♦ good hand) do you play this 2♠ as GF , or limit+ ? (Please , dont get into the debate about which of 3♦ or 3♣ should be showing ♠s - this doesnt matter for the purpose of this question)

We still lead the middle card from 3 low, because this is consistent with leading 2/4 (second best from weak suit). This lead is often difficult to read in trick1 , but it clarifies itself very well on the 2nd round. A useful advantage of leading the middle card rather than the low one, is that on the 2nd round of the suit , if you decide that the layout of this suit is more important to declarer than to partner, you can play your lowest card , pretending to have a doubleton. This ploy has been very useful for me. Still , I am not implying that "middle" is the best way to go, I could be easily convinced otherwise.

The hand is pretty good , though not good enough for a GF 3♦ for me - I would rebid 2♦. After 3♠ , perhaps what your decent-player-friend implied , is that a cue (4♣) would show 3 card ♠ support (3541, or maybe even 3631), and a direct raise to 4♠ would show doubleton ♠.

1. Pass - 1♦ is neither preemptive nor lead directing ; 1♠ is both , but we consider 4 card overcalls vulnerable to be too dangerous. 2. 1♥ - my suit is weak , but my hand is quite good, and entering the auction later may be difficult. 3. Double - showing Clubs. If partner passes , I will not bid again over 4♥, though I might bid 3♠ over 3♥.

Agree that 4♣ is natural , forcing, and denying ♥ fit. After 4♣ I would have to decide whether to violate discipline and pass his forcing bid (not unreasonable IMO) or just bid 5♣ , and hope he has enough to make.

Thanks to everybody who responded. I passed , which didn't work well when partner held : ♠AKxx ♥AJxx ♦xx ♣Jxx 3♦ by them made (♠ 3-1), 3♠ by us would make as well (♥Q onside). Just one of those things?

I think it is important that advancer can bid a nonforcing 2S here, since I think he will hold a good suit , but not-so-strong hand quite often. This hand is good for the system - overcaller can pass.

We play 1D-2C as GF. With the subject hand we bid 1NT (defined as 6-11), accepting occasionally missing game when opener has 14, but gaining when opener is minimum , and we stop low when only 7 tricks are makeable (not so rare). When opener is unbalanced 15+ , he will of course bid again.

2♥ , support ♠ later, unless pd wants to sign off in 3♣

Double , showing some useful values. On the 2nd round I like 3♣ , especially in your system, because either we have a ♣ fit , or pd with strong NT will bid again.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sqt63hatdaj42ca65]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1NT - 2♣ 2♦ - ?[/hv] 1NT is 15-17, (pd could upgrade 14 with good 5 card minor, and will not have 17 with good 5 card minor) maybe you have a better system to handle this hand, but suppose your options now are either : 3NT to play 4NT invitational (after which opener , if accepting, can show 4 or 5 card suits) your choice?

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sq7432hk42dqt4c73]133|100|Scoring: IMP P-1♣-1♦-1♠ X-2♠-P-P 3♦-P-P-?[/hv] 1♠ showed 4 cards, 2♠ is 4 card support (support XX with 3) (West's) X was t/o , showing ♥s Do you routinely follow LOTT and bid 3♠ , or are there any reasons to pass? Is it close?

An idea I saw people use : a 4NT opening showing a "good 5 of a minor" bid , somewhat like 4m Namyats opening. This opening fits well for this thread's hand.