mtvesuvius

One more thought on Namyats... Perhaps if you are doing it with many 8 card suits, you may want to have a trump quality ask. Instead of using 4 of opener's suit as a "General Purpose Slam Try", it would probably be better used as a Trump Quality ask... you could work out a set of responses to that to show different suit strengths. This way you don't have a problem like this with a void.

This was also somewhat my thinking, but on the slightly more pessimistic side :) I think that playing partner to have Axx♠ is playing for too much of a perfecto. Perhaps the risk is worth it with a fairly disciplined partner, since 3♥ vs 2♥ should (hopefully) only be a loss of 3 IMPs. If partner rebids 3m, we are stuck. Pass seems best now, trying to escape... Anything else is just making a bad situation worse. IMO, partner isn't raising spades enough, and rates to not have a hand where game is reasonable enough to try for it. Playing with most juniors that don't pay much attention to vulnerability, or playing an aggressive pre-emptive style, I think it's a pass. Playing with Andrew or a few of my other partners, I'd bid 2♠. One more interesting thought: Would you change your bid if 2♥ could be 5? What if it promised a side 4cm?

For some reason, I feel like a low diamond is the right lead... But I'd lead the ♥4

Generally the best way to get around this problem is to have a way to Keycard, as well as a way to DCB/Spiral Scan. I've seen a lot of problem hands in relay-type systems, where Spiral Scanning just plain won't work, or leaves a bad guess (I am 1-8 on those now I think, about 5-60 in the bidding room, ask Owen...). If you don't want to, or don't have room for (!) any RKC-type bids, you'll have to break the relay a lot more often to set trumps earlier. It takes a while to get a feel for when to do this, but often it's the only solution.

It seemed fairly logical to me, perhaps I was too tired when I read it though: 13 hour journey back from the Reno NABC after not having any sleep the night before... Sorry for the mild thread-jacking... I guess I'll go write something about Namyats then ;)

Depends on partner. With most partners I would pass. There is a couple people I would bid 2♠ with though. In general though, we need an awful lot from partner to have a decent chance at game.

Thanks Glen, glad you liked it :)

I would definitely pass over 5♣, and 5♦ X on the first one. The extra spade is not enough to pull, since partner should not be expecting too many spade tricks on this auction anyway. On the second one, it's fairly close, I misclicked a vote for pass... I would double though. I'm having a hard time seeing 6♣/6♦ making, however I'll be ready to apologize (as usual) if it does.

In general you want the Namyats bidder to declare. Since that hand rates to be more distributional, you want it hidden, this way the opponents won't know clearly which aces/kings to cash. IMO, this is MUCH more valuable than any type of a slam try. I usually play something like: 4D -> 4H to sign off (or ask for specific controls/aces -- 4S) 4H - General Purpose Slam Try 4S - RKC 4N - Spade Cuebid 5C+ - Cuebids

Huh? Please don't tell me you're still trying to justify not leading a stiff here.

IMPs I'd probably open 1♠. MPs it's close between 3♠ and 1♠, I'd probably go for 3♠.

Isn't there a bit of reverse psychology there as well? After all, if you lead a stiff and it is clear to the opponents that it is a stiff... Are they likely to play you for the ♥Q? I'd do it from either one, and I suspect most experts would as well...

You've never led a singleton before? IMO, LHO is very unlikely to have two stiffs. I win the ♣A, and cross to hand with the ♠A, and play ♥A, and ♥J, running it if ducked.

4♠, I'll use the hog's reasoning if I have to explain it to someone. Although we rate to be going for a fairly large number, often the opponents will be forced to guess, and will guess wrong.

It does, and you'll have more trumps than them at least half the time anyway.

Seems normal enough

No last spade pitch... only 11 tricks unless I am not seeing something

[hv=pc=n&s=sk76hakq82dk4ca83&w=sqt9542h4djt876c6&n=saj83h97653dckq42&e=shjtdaq9532cjt975]399|300|I won't give our auction, but it is fairly safe to say that N might have had some trouble over 7♦. Perhaps he could figure it out still?[/hv]

True, 7♠ would only be -2000 (or -2300) :lol:

Yup, 2♦ wtp... Should be natural here IMO

No, actually, as far as I know, all his posts are like that.

Sometimes partner does that, but honestly, I think that almost everyone would double with that hand. I understand that you are not suggesting that it will always work out, however I think that responding 1♥ (or 1♠) here is definitely better than 2♣. It will usually win when partner does not have a strong hand, and we can still survive sometimes when partner does have a strong hand (if we bid 2♣ and partner raises, things really are not good). Sometimes partner will raise our major and things will go bad, but it won't be the first time I've played in a 4-3 fit. Perhaps it's better to respond 1♠ on 3-3 as well to avoid later problems, but IMO, responding 2♣ is taking it to the extreme.

So are the 2♣ bidders saying they would NOT double with Axxx KJTx Axx Qx?

Good point. Still not sure if it's best to play a heart and plan to hook, but leaning toward yes as well. Still need to be careful to play a low spade off dummy in case RHO has a stiff King.

Who let GIB take over his account? :)