nigel_k

If partner chooses to rebid 2♥, I am happy to play there. If they then find their spades and compete to 3♠ after I take the push to 3[HE[, I am happy with that too.

With no special agreements, you have to choose between pass, 3♥ and 2NT. And 2NT also shows a hand I don't have.

The people who almost never downgrade will answer that neither is a downgrade, as you would expect. But the first is a pretty obvious downgrade for the rest of us.

I might have tried 3♥ with West but pass is fine too. Partner won't always have a maximum with three card support and well fitting cards. Agree with 2♥ by East. I superaccept on three card support more than most people but wouldn't with this hand.

The main cases for redoubling are: 1. Lead directing doubles, e.g. they double your Stayman bid because they have some clubs. If you are the 1NT opener and have something like AJ9x in clubs you should redouble. Even if RHO has KQTxx you will likely make 2♣XX when your side has most of the values. And partner can pull with an unsuitable hand. They usually have nowhere to run to when this happens which makes it particularly good. 2. Lightner doubles, i.e. doubling a slam to direct a lead. This is because the Lightner double risks a six IMP loss if the contract makes, but can be a 17 IMP gain the the requested lead is necessary to defeat the contract. So the double can be a percentage action even if you know the contract may still make. But if opponents tend to redouble often, this is much less attractive. 3. They double your 1NT opening bid. Most times the doubler doesn't have enough to beat the contract in their own hand and are (correctly) hoping their partner has something. So you make them pay when they get it wrong.

If you think that the choice supported by the best arguments is always the same as the choice that worked at the table, I have some sad news for you.

I've been playing weak NT all my life and I definitely think you should run with 4-4 if the hand is weak enough that 1NT is unlikely to make. If they double your 14-16 the situation is not that different. With a hand such as xx Qxxx JTxx xxx I would hate to be playing a method where my choices are putting down dummy in 1NTX or guessing which red suit. I really doubt there is a strong majority for playing 1NTx when responder is 4-4 and weak.

I would bid. I like voids and six card suits, but it certainly could work out badly.

I agree with frank0 and in general you shouldn't lighten your initial actions just because they do. But I understand double if you have no way to show hearts and diamonds. It was quite unlucky that you have so much in diamonds and 2♠X would be pretty good if North's minor suits were 3-5 instead of 5-3. Also, it looks like maybe the contract is down one if you keep playing diamonds, giving a ruff and discard on the third round, but there could be a line I have missed.

I have always preferred that the suit bid on your right is natural and the one bid on your left is a cue bid (Michaels or whatever depending on context). Because you want the enemy trumps onside, not offside. But I do live in a place where people seldom open one of a minor with less than four cards.

It's hard to argue these kind of things because there are bad cases for any method and it becomes a question of frequency. And the frequencies are not something you can easily calculate mathematically or any other way. Slawinski's work is interesting though. The clarity of the different options also depends on whether you normally lead 3rd or 4th. Against suits I prefer 3rd/lowest, second choice is top which I think is actually ok, especially if you don't lead doubletons that often and declarer false cards as badly as 99% of declarers do. Against NT I prefer top, second choice is low. I never play MUD now (that and Multi are the only two things I will refuse to play with a casual partner) but did play it a lot years ago and it just seemed much harder to read.

I agree with this.

I think hearts are trumps unless opener rebids 3NT over 3♥. So 3♠ is a cue bid.

South 80%. You are unlikely to reach slam, especially at matchpoints so you want to be in hearts. I would have rebid 3♥ instead of 2♥ with South based on the heart texture and club fit. I also prefer 3♥ to 2NT with North, which would have ensured you reach game. But 3♣ is a clear underbid and the worst call.

It's probably unsound but non-vul at matchpoints I would always bid.

It would be good to know partner's overcalling style because, in my style, his failure to overcall non-vul rules out a number of possible layouts. But I am probably playing a trump.

If you want a rule, below is something I came up with a while ago. As with any rule, there will be plenty of exceptions. Start by counting HCP Add one for each honour in your long suit Subtract one for each Q or J outside the long suit Add three for each card beyond five Add one with a singleton in the suit opened or two with a void Overcall at the one level with 10+ non vulnerable or 11+ vulnerable Overcall at the two level with 15+ non vulnerable or 17+ vulnerable This means your example hand (Kxx xx AQxxx Kxx) would be a minimum overcall non-vul if it had the ♦10 as well and would be a minimum overcall vul with an extra diamond. You can also loosen it a little if your overcall consumes space, e.g. (1♦)-2♣ needs a bit less than (1♠)-2♣ because it has more ways to gain for the same risk.

It is true that a lot of people do this but they are wrong and you should ignore them.

In this kind of situation you are always going to bid the second suit if partner doesn't support the first one. If you respond 3♠ and partner bids 3NT, you continue with 4♥. You are likely to have an eight card major fit somewhere. You are correct that it doesn't actually matter much which major you bid first when partner opens 1NT, but there is a general principle that you bid the higher ranking five card suit first because it matters in other auctions. After you bid the second suit, partner can give preference to the first suit without raising the level. He can't do this if you bid the lower ranking suit first.

If we run the ten, we gain when East has a small singleton. If we cash a top honour then run the ten, we gain when East has singleton Q or J. These are equally likely. Both lines also work if East has singleton 9.

I always overcall on these hands with lots of values and a poorish suit, but I don't think it's anywhere near as clearcut as that.

A cue bid followed by a new suit is forcing for just about everyone isn't it? Unless they have the specific agreement that it is not, 3NT is certainly a logical alternative to passing 3♦. It's not 100% clear that pass is suggested by the UI, but it probably is because they haven't started doubling yet and partner could be preparing to launch us into the stratosphere.

It's better to play hearts because, if they are 3-3, you can set up a tenth trick after losing the lead twice. If you play on clubs and they are 3-3, you set up a club trick after losing two of them, but you still need to lose a heart as well in order to set up a trick there. They will probably have a spade to cash by then. On the actual hand, hearts were 3-3, but you were unable to reach the long heart. You needed to keep ♦K as an entry.

I might bid 1♠ (but not 2♥) with West but would definitely bid with East, either 2♠ or 1♠ according to style. You have a six card major and it's only at the one level.

I like to generate random hands and we both just write down how we think the bidding should go (using all four hands). Then we compare. Obviously there is some risk of resulting in the auction when you see all the cards, but the gain is that you can get through a lot of hands and do most of it by email whenever you have some spare time, rather than needing to allocate a large chunk of time when you are both available. Don't forget leads and carding agreements, though I don't know a good way to practice those.