mtvesuvius

Sounds about right. Pattern bid, usually 3451 or such.

HUGE plus vote from me, Michael. It may seem like a fantasy (and perhaps it is), but I would love to see that happen as well, and would certainly put in a lot of time making FD cards.

I'd pass over 2♥, just because I don't want to hear 3♠ over my 3♦ overcall... Then 4♠ over 4♣ etc. I'd bid 3♦ as well over the Reopening Double, although I admit I was tempted by a 4N call now, lol Over 3N I bid 4♣, unfortunately we've wrongsided both minors potentially, but I think this is worth an investigation of slam, at the very least.

I'd double as well. Seems too likely we are beating this a couple tricks, and if partner has long solid clubs, he's allowed to take another call, such as 3N or 4♣. Edit: Just saw your reply. That seems like a clear pull IMO. A 3♠ call would work nicely as a Last Train to 3N, and I think that's the bid with your partner's hand.

Assuming the bidding was natural, I blame South. Partner has shown a slammish 13(45) or 04(45), even after South made a penalty double of 3♠. I think that without anything wasted in spades, South should certainly move over 4♥, bidding 4♠ seems to be a turnoff to partner. I'd bid 5♣ over 4♥. North should bid 6♦ now IMO. North could have also bid 3♠ over 2♠, but perhaps not best without an agreement if this is a stopper ask, or a splinter etc... I certainly don't want to be in a grand!!!

Let me get this straight... You have an agreement to double on total crap, and partner has to bid accordingly, such as not jumping to the three level with 10 HCP and a 5 card suit? What do you do with a real takeout double? Cuebid? lol

Certainly playing limited openings I would, and I think there is a strong case for opening 1♥ in standard as well. Good spots, Jxx♠, easy rebid. What could possibly go wrong?

2♣ seems normal. Once again, if my secondary suit was hearts it might be a bit harder, but whatever happens now, we can bid spades next. Unfortunately it may have to be on the 3 level, but I think this hand is good enough.

Sorry, missed an original pass. However my other points still stand, and partner still may treat you to have your bid, causing him to do something to give you a bad score.

I was 6 months old then =)

Yes, I'd pass 2♠ now

I double. 3N is a close second, but it's right to be playing in a suit contract much too often IMO. I pass if partner bids 4♠. I bid 3N over 3♠, and correct to 4♥ otherwise.

Yup, with a maximum and 2 (or 3, depending on your style) good spades. 2♠ is not a unilateral decision saying "I want to play here, I don't care what you have."

When you double: You ruin partnership trust You grossly mis-state your values Partner will be bidding, and competing, expecting you to have something Partner may double expecting more than -1 tricks in your hand There will be more 4 digit numbers on your card, and not all from declaring. Did I mention that doubling with Ax xxx AQxx xxxx after 1♣ - X - 4♠ is normal? Even 1♦ probably isn't best, but I'm not convinced it's right to pass.

Right, because nobody likes bidding a 5 card spade suit to the AK, with an opening hand.

In 2/1: 1♠ - 2♣ [Natural/Clubs or Balanced (2+♣), GF] 2♦ - 4♣ [More Natural Bidding/Clubs are Trump, demands Cuebids etc] 4♥ - 4N [Denying ♦ Control/RKC] 5♥ - 6♣ [2 Without ♣Q/Let's play here] or perhaps if using Minorwood, 4♣ as RKC immediately. Another option is bidding only 3♣ then 4♣. In a Relay Precision-type system: 1♠ - 2♣ [Natural, Limited/Artificial GF Relay] 2♥ - 3♣ [4+♦/Relay Break - Sets ♣ as trump, demands cuebids] 3♥ - 4♦ [Cuebid/RKC] 4NT - 6♣ [2 Without ♣Q/Let's play here]

Something seems wrong with using S1 as showing a void. This seems inefficient, and won't come up nearly often enough to pay off. I'd recommend something like: 4C - Begin Spiral-Scan/DCB 4D - End Signal (or Regular Blackwood) 4H - RKC - Longest Suit 4S - RKC - Lowest of the three remaining suits 4N - RKC - Middle of the three remaining suits 5C - RKC - Highest of the three remaining suits 5D - ERKC - Exclude Longest Suit 5H - ERKC - Exclude Lowest of the three remaining suits ... For the ERKC calls, often it is very cramped, but IMO, it's not worth moving up in any stack. You can respond to ERKC in # of Controls, or just aces... Either way, I think this is better than using a very low bid to start ERKC type auctions.

Not much hope in spades. Partner cannot really have too much elsewhere. I'd return a low heart as well... Admittedly I might have overcalled 1♥ though.

♠ AT9 ♥ A98 ♦ AT98 ♣ T98 is 6NT and ♠ QJ2 ♥ QJ2 ♦ QJ32 ♣ Q32 is a pass. WTP?

I'm having trouble finding hands where partner isn't excited about a 4♣ bid, and slam is not making (or is not odds on). Seems a 5323 or 6322 type is most likely. I bid 5N pick a slam just in case. Can't see passing here, although I guess it could work.

1♦. Bad things happen when I double with hands like this.

Opening a hand like that with 1♠ is awful bridge. You're completely screwed if partner raises, you're completely screwed if partner bids something and we wind up declaring at all. You have plenty of defense/spot cards. You are balanced, you have no Aces or Kings. Need I say more? Not even I would psych that 1♠.

Agree on most of this, however I am strongly against Negative Votes. Not sure if you kept up with this full thread (I know I did not), but the last time I was looking at it, someone mentioned why Negative votes is a very bad idea. Basically, I don't think people should be allowed to freely vote a post down. It could be used as an act of "revenge" or just if someone points out that you are wrong, or are in a minority. I think that allowing + votes is good, and that - ones should not be allowed. On your last point, you can still "make" text invisible by setting the font colour to white.

Double and pray. Even better playing with an agressive partner, who would pre-empt lots of trash. Only problem is they are 2nd seat R/R. I honestly don't see a better solution than double, but I'm certainly concerned about partner pulling.

Yup, looks about right.