nigel_k

I agree that it's Michaels but wouldn't expect weak or strong to apply in fourth seat even if we agreed it in second seat.

4♣ on the first and 3♥ on the second. There will be hard decisions later but I don't see much we can do on this round to avoid that.

There must be something wrong with my brain because I have never been motivated much by masterpoints and can't understand why so many other people seem to be.

When I play K for count, partner is expected to play the J if they have it. So you lead Q (or small) from KQ alone, but K from KQ10.

1♠ on the first and 3♠ next round if there is one. An immediate 3♠ would be ideal if it shows this hand but I'd rather not put partner to the test if we haven't discussed it. Immediate 3♠ on the second because nothing else is remotely close to describing what I have.

I am bidding 4♠. Game might be poor if partner is minumum with some diamond wastage and the wrong cards elsewhere, e.g. Axxxx KQxx Qx xx. But it's too pessimistic to try to cater to that specifically when so many other minimums make game near cold.

I think 3-1 hearts is not a problem even if clubs are 4-2. Let's say West has a doubleton club and three trumps. Win the king of diamonds, clubs to the ace, club ruff, diamond to the ace, club ruff and West overruffs. Now whatever West does I have the entries to ruff both a diamond and a club high and still return to draw West's last trump. Should be ok unless clubs are 5-1, trumps 4-0, or LHO passed throughout with a doubleton club and stiff trump.

I don't think you can make at all if West has a small singleton club and the AQ of spades. ♣A works if West has stiff K. Running the queen works if West has stiff J or Jx, and also when East has KJx and the queen of spades. So I would run the queen.

Easily worth 2♣ for me. I try to avoid it with two suiters, especially non-touching ones, but this is far too good for a one level opening.

I don't think the precise definition of 2♥ affects the 3♥ call very much. Partner needs a pretty good six card suit to bid them three times when he has 3♦, 3♠ and 3NT as alternatives.

Definitely 4♥. This is a good B/I problem though. 3NT will usually play worse than 4♥ if partner has the hand he has already shown.

Both forcing. I prefer not to change it according to vulnerability. Probably it is optimal to do that but my life is complicated enough already. I would pass on both.

Basically agree with Mikeh. I would want to bid 3♠ with South but probably wouldn't. However we still get too high as I would not settle for 4♠ over the double. 5♠ is not hopeless though.

Agree with the first pass and will bid 6♥ now. 5NT for me suggests alternative strains. 6♣ is possible but obviously partner might have a club and I'm also not sure we are good enough to invite grand.

I agree with the auction up to 3♥. After that, I think anything except 3NT should show heart support so would cue bid 3♠ with South. In any case I would bid on after 4♥ as South on the given auction. I can't see how North can do more, even if his hand was a bit better.

What is a jump to 2♥ immediately over 1♦? If it is weak, then something like 1♦-1♥-2♦-2♥ can be used for invitational hands so a jump is GF. If you use 1♦-2♥ as reverse Flannery or something else then I think you have to invent a new suit with a game forcing hand. On the actual hand I would bid 4♥. FSF followed by 3♥ does not suggest such a strong suit and FSF then 4♥ ought to be this type but stronger.

I would just rebid hearts. I have AKQJxx. If they can tap me playing in hearts they can probably also cut off partner from the heart suit if we play in spades. And I don't want double to end the auction.

I would bid 3♥ with East and end up in 4♠. It has some play I suppose. Sometimes you get too high when both players have promising looking hands and you don't discover until too late that they fit badly.

I voted pass, thinking it is not forcing. My view is that there are two rules in play here: 1. We have announced the high card values for game. Not the case here as the 3NT bidder has to do something and may not be especially strong. 2. They are obviously sacrificing. Also not the case as RHO was never in a position where his pass might end the auction, so could have anything.

No problem. We'll call you both Justin as we did before.

Minor suit partscores are underrated at matchpoints. I would always pass at matchpoints and totally agree with Justin's reasons. At IMPs I actually think it's closer because you don't want to miss a game but I would still pass probably.

Ok, let me ask a followup question. Partner holds: ??? x KQxxx AKxx What spade holding (not including the king) makes the hand a minimum for further action after a 2♦ preference? Bear in mind that you may be opposite xxx KJxxx Jx Qxx (and that is not a minimum).

No it's just a general observation. I don't follow soccer at all. But presumably the guy had some record of success before being hired and didn't suddenly become incompetent later.

The suit quality aspect of Ogust just doesn't seem that useful to me. You can show feature or shortness instead, but I prefer shortness, e.g. First step: minimum with a shortage anywhere Second step: maximum with a shortage anywhere Third step: minimum no shortage Fourth step: maximum no shortage Or you can just show the shortness regardless of strength and partner may then bid three of the major which you pass with minimum and bid on with maximum. But obviously this won't work if you 'psyche' 2NT often. You may want to use 2♠ not 2NT as the asking bid after a 2♥ opening. If the weak two may be a five card suit, i would definitely recommend the first step as any hand with a five card suit. This leaves space to investigate strain if needed. Start showing shortage/range with the second step.

Even a non-forcing 1NT response is semi-conventional. If you have a minimum response and cannot raise or respond in a new suit at the one level, you have to bid 1NT regardless of shape. For example, if partner opens 1♥ you can respond 1NT on any of the following: Qxx xx Axxx Jxxx. This is a 'classic' example but is hardly typical. Since you are limited to 6-9 HCP the odds are quite high that one of the side suits won't have any high cards. xxx xx Axxx QJxx. This is an absolutely normal 1NT and there is no other possible action. xx x Axxxx QJxxx. Again, absolutely normal and correct 1NT. No possible alternative. xx x Axx QJxxxxx. Ditto. You aren't strong enough for 2♣ but cannot pass with 7 HCP so have to bid 1NT.