nigel_k

I think it's fine to double on a hand that would have responded 1♥ and this qualifies very easily. However I would bid 4♦. The heart suit won't matter unless we happen to strike a layout where both 5♦ and 5♥ are making which is fairly unlikely compared to the good things that can happen if we raise to the limit immediately.

Great article. Not sure about the fishing quota one though. Yes, you can dump the excess fish but surely it's easier to just stop fishing and go home once you hit the limit.

Full hand is here - number 45

You guys clearly have a different idea of blame than I do. South's 1♠ opening is atrocious but did not cause the bad result. In fact it paved the way for +1100 on a partscore hand. North's failure to double 2NT was the most costly choice, and second was North choosing 3NT instead of 4♥. I suppose South didn't have to bid 3♦ but the bidding suggested North would have a minimum redouble and probably three card support which might play ok.

2NT is a better game try, for two reasons: 1. It's a better description as the hand is quite balanced and partner's diamond holding is not key, you may do fine opposite xxx. 2. If partner's judgment is poor, he doesn't get to use it much over 2NT. All he can really do is signoff with a minimum, bid game with a maximum, or show where his values lie which means you get captaincy.

[hv=pc=n&e=saqt74hk32d952ca7&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=3d]133|200[/hv] IMPs, strong opponents. Their preempting style is fairly standard I think if that matters.

The director would need to poll people. My view is that passing 1NTx is a logical alternative, though I would not choose it. However I don't think the UI makes pulling to 2♥ more attractive.

You don't want to reveal information unnecessarily, especially if you are going to be declarer. Just pass or bid 6NT. Alternatively, have the agreement that you bid 5♣ with any accept, leaving space for partner to fluff around if they decide it's best to do that.

North did stretch a little and 3♥ would have been a better choice 3♠. I suppose two eight card fits is literally a 'double fit' but is nothing to get too excited about. The 4333 is not an problem though when partner has shape. It's really just a general lack of high cards that is the problem. North was a bit unlucky to strike such an unsuitable South hand. Opposite something like AQxxx Kxxx x Axx 4♥ could make when their 3♦ also makes. It's also unlucky to go for -500 when they have no game, though -200 would have been almost as bad. What was the full layout?

I disagree. North's pass of 3NT could have been right though I don't really like it. But South's 3NT instead of 4♣ was the worst call and rates to be a silly contract most of the time, and merely an inferior one otherwise.

By people who are too lazy to say 'modified puppet' and/or think that 'muppet' sounds cooler.

One option is to treat a strong 4441 hand as balanced. In this case, if West opened 2NT, East would keeping bidding up to 6NT. It would be hard to reach 7♣ though. The actual 1♣ opening is fine though. After opener's reverse, East has a very suitable hand with (he thinks) nine trumps and well fitting cards. If forced to pick a contract immediately over 2♦ with the East cards, I would pick 6♣ not 3NT. But East is not forced to decide immediately and can just support clubs and allow the auction to develop. West will cooperate very happily of course.

4♠. I like to preempt and I like it even better when opponents refuse to preempt with a hand that fails to satisfy their high standards for purity.

I would bid 4♣. Maybe partner is 1336 but I don't really need to know what the double means when I hold this hand, especially since I would have bid 4♣ last time.

Probably I am still in the stone age but I would have thought 3♥ was non forcing and you need to bid 3♣ with a GF.

1. Pass 2. 4♥

If West bids 3♥ over 2♠ East can use Blackwood. If you have a two suiter and opponents are threatening to preempt to a high level but your system prevents you showing either suit, then you need to change the system.

The incorrect designation did not and could not mislead the opponent because everyone can see that dummy's small diamond is the six. There is no reason to think that East would have played differently if declarer had said "six of diamonds".

I assume South bid 2♣ not East. South's actions are debatable but North's failure to double 1♥, then 1NT over 1♠ and finally pass of 2♣ are the worst calls of the auction and contributed by far the most to the bad result.

Double. And I would suggest bidding 3♣ with a hand where partner is expected to bid 3NT with 18-19 balanced. Otherwise it is too low frequency and you want to be making this sort of bid as often as possible.

It's close. I would pass but double is fine too.

I would not jump to 4♠ with no shortage. The law is poor at any level but gets worse as you go higher, and we have no idea how many trumps they have anyway. I would just bid 3♣ and pass 3♠ from partner.

Suppose someone is taken ill and you are asked to substitute. After taking your seat, you are told that RHO has passed as dealer and it your call. You are also told that partner is barred from the auction for one round only. Based only on the above authorised information, it is 100% certain that partner made an opening pass out of turn. The UI does not suggest anything because it adds no new information.

Declarer having precisely KQJ of hearts and a side loser seems less likely than KQx/KJ9/QJ9 of hearts and no side loser. Partner also could maybe have helped by ruffing the third club and exiting passively if he has a trick somewhere.

If 3♦ might not be forcing, then partner is agreeing diamonds and making sure we don't have an accident. If we're 100% clear that 3♦ would be forcing then the splinter interpretation does make sense but I still wouldn't expect partner to try it.My hand also suggests he doesn't have it. So I am just going to cue bid hearts and proceed as if diamonds are trumps.