Jlall

I'm bidding because I think we might have a game or save in spades if we have a 5-4 fit there. If partner starts going crazy, that's fine with me, I have a good hand for spades. If he goes crazy reversing or something, I have 5 trumps and a stiff in support of his first suit, and I am not ashamed of my hand at all (since he also will have 5 clubs). If he has 18-19 balanced I guess he will bid 2N and we cannot get out in 3C anymore, but in that case the opponents have more than half the deck plus a fit so I'm not really worried. If my goal was simply to mess with the opponents I would choose 3C over 1S.

Yes I thought 3C was normal, and 1S was weird. I like 1S because if partner has 18-19 bal with 4 spades I'm happy to play game, and if partner has 4 spades in general we will often have a good save over them in spades. Points shmoints? I'm not looking to play a 5-3 fit, and it should be relatively easy to avoid. Also, obviously 3C should make life tougher for them than 1S, but I think that bidding a new suit and not immediately announcing a weak hand and a club fit can cause different problems for the opponents, even if they're good. Still, taking away a whole extra level of the bidding is obviously better for destructive purposes. I really don't understand pass..

Why is this obvious? If the T and the 9 are 100 % to draw the 8, I think he can say "all mine." Just like if he had AKQJT5432 and he said "all mine" I would have no problem with it.

1S

Weird hand... guess I'd give it 5H, we don't need much for slam.

If there is only 1 or 2 clubs left, then yes certainly. If there are 3+ but declarer knows the clubs are splitting via counting and can demonstrate this, then yes. If there are 3+ clubs left, and declarer has no idea how they split, then no I do not allow it because he forgot the 8 was out and thinks all of his clubs are equal. Strongly disagree with jdonn, if someone forgets a card is out they should lose a trick to it. This is very different than if there were 2 clubs out and declarer knew that the T and 9 would draw the remaining clubs, in which case he should not lose a trick.

My best laughs are always hanp jokes ainec

With 5332 in range for 2N or 2C...2N I will always open the appropriate range of NT. While this is a debatable style if we have a hand in range of a 1N opener, I don't think it's very debatable for the stronger range hands because there is just no way to show a balanced 20 count after opening 1S playing standard methods. If you had some specialized methods, maybe it would become debatable again. So to me it's just a question of 2N or 2C..2N, 1S is a very distant third since I will have to show a different type of hand than the one I have. 2C then 2S likewise would show a different hand.

lol really? That's probably how they came up with his name then. Now it's just synonymous with badass

Your hand is balanced, so you should not think in terms of losers, but rather in how many HCP your hand is worth. Since I would evaluate your hand as too good to open 2N, I would open 2C and rebid 2N.

Yeah 2C then 2N is not horrible at all imo. It is a better description than 2C then 2S to me.

What does X then 3N over 3S suggest? Surely that would imply 4 spades and a (not so great) heart stopper, else I would have started by bidding 3N to begin with? The problem with that is that even if I expect partner to pull with 4 spades, 5C might be the right contract rather than 3N if partner has a 3 card spade holding. What about X then 4C over 3S? Is that forcing? Probably not, I could have been trying to get to 3N and now when partner couldn't bid it, I'm trying to stop in 4C opposite a min. That would be a useful agreement here though. Gnasher is probably right that 4H should be a COG over 3S, but I think my partners would take it as a slam try in spades. X and 3N over 3S at least seems like a possibility though. I think 5C rates to be better than 3N when partner has 3 spades though, so I'd prefer gnasher's option of X then 4H. If 4C was forcing over 3S then 4H should be a slam try in spades though imo, but as I said I don't think it is.

How about this logic: If partner is 4135 he will always X 1H (and almost always with 4225, but we "know" thats not his shape anyways). If partner is 4126 he will often bid 4S over our X(?), ergo partner is often 3-6 if he bids 3S? Not sure if I agree with that btw, just thinking out loud. I think the first part is good, but the second part is probably questionable.

Dearest Art, I have respectfully considered your arguments on why bidding 4N might be better than doubling. However, I think that picking a few hands where bidding 4N works better than doubling is a bad way to go about deciding which is a better call, because there are many possible outcomes. If you wanted to do a simulation of thousands of hands, that might work, but cherry picking one or two hands where 4N works better than doubling is not helpful, since you could easily do the same and pick the worst case outcomes for bidding 4N, where doubling works much better, and advance that as an argument for doubling. Again, that argument would not mean much. You have successfully proven that there are deals on which bidding 4N works better than doubling, but you have done nothing to prove that bidding 4N will work better than doubling in the long run. That is fine, because there is not much you can do, except maybe an extensive simulation, in order to do so. But to pick a few hands that you yourself created with the purpose not of finding truth, but simply of backing up your decision to bid 4N rather than to double, does not advance your cause much. This is what the user "jdonn" was saying when he asked roger (sarcastically, in case you missed it), what parnter would do with KQT9 of spades and out. This is what the user "rogerclee" was saying, when he very reasonably said " I wasn't trying to prove that it was impossible for 4N to work out better than double. I was trying to explain why it was less likely to work out better. " In response to this, you created a couple more examples where bidding 4N is right. What do you expect in response to this? Would it mean much to you if I said "yeah, but partner can have QJx xx xx QJxxxx!" Of course, you would then see that as a futile excersize to further my agenda of being "right" when I say that double is better than 4N, and that it is really quite meaningless. You might not see that I am doing the exact same thing that you did when you created some hands. You might consider that people who think double is better than 4N realize that 4N can work better than double. Even if they LOL the notion of bidding 4N, it does not mean that they think 4N will never work better. They might similarly LOL the notion of passing with 20 HCP in 4th seat, even though you, ArtK, could create a layout where that pass would be a winner. You would probably then get LOLed some more, or perhaps be subject to sarcastic and snide comments though. Luv, Jlall

I thought about 1264 but I think it can be heavily discounted because LHO would raise to 4D with 4 of them at w/r I think.

Jack Bauerrrrrrrrrrr Note: I do not condone torture.

It's called the watercooler! Every thread is hall of fame worthy there

1C p 1D (3x) you can bid just as if they had opened 3x, except with different ranges obviously. But still X is takeout, X and then bidding is flexibility not extra strength, new suit bid non forcing, etc. You can trap pass and expect partner to reopen with the right shape if they dont have a complete yarb etc. 1C p 1M (3x) maybe I am old fashioned but I use penalty doubles, and with my flexible hand types I start with a forcing pass.

3S to finish describing my shape, and because partner can still be 6-3 in the pointed suits pretty easily.

Too light for 2C imo

♥ I know Han said he'd bid 4S also, but he didn't post it! Are you sure? That seems to disagree with his above agreement with me. Reading comprehension? You said it's closer to too good for a limit raise than not good enough for a limit raise. As someone who bids 4S, I know that I agree with that statement...

I'd play for the squeeze, RHO is 1723 or 2272 almost always I think.

obv

I'm happy to just bid 4H with hearts this good

It's fine to do it sometimes with a 6 card major, but the hand you gave is not the time to do it. You will frequently belong in the major suit when you have that hand.