mtvesuvius

LOL

I would treat this as penalty, however Andy's auction above I think I would play as penalty as well. A 3♣ call in the second auction seems like the "takeout double," and a 2♠ call in the first one is the same. I think that in this auction it is much likelier to have a penalty double (how else do you bid this hand now?) than to have a takeout double where bidding 2♠/3♣ would be a problem. I'm sure standard is penalty, but I think that Standard is right for a change :lol:

Perhaps something like inverted psycho suction openings? 2♣ - ♣ or ♦+♥ or ♥+♣ 2♦ - ♦ or ♥+♠ or ♠+♦ 2♥ - ♥ or ♠ and ♣ 2♠ - ♠ or ♣ and ♦

The squeeze line works, but you have to transfer the guard: [hv=pc=n&s=sak64hdakt943ca62&w=st8hqt6dj862ct543&n=sqj93hkj953dck987&e=s752ha8742dq75cqj&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=p1hp2dp2sp3sp4sp4np5d(0/3)p5h(sQ%3F)p6c(Yes%3B%20cK)p7sppp]399|300|Was wondering if there might be any reasonable way to figure out to do that?[/hv]

Playing in a bracket 1 KO at the Regional in Daytona Beach, against fairly good opponents, I held: [hv=pc=n&e=sk93hk72d4caqj972&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1d1h4s]133|200|Sitting East, your call? Partner is an expert, but is under 40 y/o[/hv]

4N for me as well. Sometimes things don't work out, if we made everything we bid, bridge wouldn't be fun :)

Probably 6♦ for me, although most people who know me well would probably guess I would pass this :) I am not bidding over 6M, so bidding to the level that I am going to bid later anyway seems reasonable enough.

I routinely pass hands with 0-5 HCP and no 6 card suit. Ooooooooh, aaaaaaaahhhh.

2♥ for me as well.

No blame IMO. I would duplicate that auction as well.

I believe he was referring to an auction like 1♠-2♠-3♠ being simply blocking, and not being invitational. It is not relevant to this situation at all.

This is completely faulty logic. In this auction, you are not only doubling to find a Major Suit fit (you are 5-4!), but also to protect partner, who may have been making a trap pass of 3♦. There are plenty of 11 counts that it is completely right to balance against. There are plenty of 7 counts even. Qxxx Jxxx xxx Ax is just one of them. How would you feel if you passed this out, and partner had something like Qxx xx AKTxx Axx? I'd recommend you try to construct some hands where balancing with a double will lead to a very bad result; and not because partner didn't have the ♦9.You are a passed hand, now balancing W/R: Partner won't hang you, and will be very pleased to see a double when they passed with a diamond stack, which is quite likely here. Sometimes bad results happen, and this is a case of an unfortunate lie of the cards. And to some members of the B/I, when making a Takeout double in Direct seat, you can usually place partner with an "average" of 7-8 HCP (not 11!), scattered ones however, not the perfectos. In balancing, I don't believe any simulations have been run to establish one way or the other... 11 points sounds reasonable, but more often than not, you're bidding to protect partner who may have had to pass over 3♦ with a fairly good hand.

1♣ was 3+♣. 2♣ could be 4 I guess, undiscussed though.

Next time I am designing a system, I'll design it so it has no advantages over standard, but plenty of flaws :)

The general standard treatments of these calls is something like this: 4N - 2 Suited Takeout, not necessarily Minors. 5♥ - Slam forcing(?), often 3 suited, this bid is somewhat ambigous 5N - Slam forcing, pick a slam. Support for ♠, ♦ and ♣, wanting to involve partner in the decision.

Same here.

Based on your usual agreements... Where did we go wrong then? :)

I passed in first seat?

So I was playing a friendly team match with an expert (a real one, not BBO one) partner. We don't have too many agreements etc, but are playing 2/1 with a 14-16 NT, and produced this auction: [hv=pc=n&s=sakq9ha65dkq7c984&n=s5hq42dat53cakt63&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1cp2cp2sp3dp3hp3np4nppp]266|200|Where did we go wrong here? What is 1♣ - 2♣ - 3N?[/hv]

So is your style to not pre-empt 4M with an outside Keycard I assume then? Otherwise it is pretty much impossible to find any outside Keycards (Unless you were to use 5♣ as RKC or something...)

Really? You want to be in a grand on a finesse? If that's not resulting, I don't know what is.

My biggest fear is partner being 2-2 actually. Now the Grand has almost no play.

5♣. Bad things happen when I double in cases like this, I expect something like AJTxx Kxx AKxx x in dummy.

In general my cuebidding style is the same as yours it sounds like. Aces and Kings both, Keycard can resolve the differences later (or more cuebidding). My post was generalizing the fact that partner could not cuebid anything, which implies that he doesn't have anything. You could take this a step further and make 4N as a queen ask if you were really feeling imaginative. But coming back to my original point that we could still be off a Keycard in trump, it should be RKC still. Perhaps in my cuebidding style, 5N should then be asking for Queens, not Kings ;)

Certainly possible, many 8-4s etc... Which is why if I can bid 5♠ on a hand like this I'll be a lot happier :) However, I think a minimum for me might be something like KJT9xxx - Qxxxx x... Tough to say exactly. I wouldn't call it highly constructive, but I think that it should be a hand that won't be incredibly uncomfortable if partner moves over the 4♠ opener. Somewhere between pre-emptive and constructive... "Mixed" :)