nigel_k

[hv=pc=n&s=skq82ha97632dqt4c&w=s96h4daj973cajt87&n=sjt753hqjdk5ck653&e=sa4hkt85d862cq942]399|300[/hv] The full hand. We ended in 4♥ after some poor choices in the bidding and probably poor methods as well. Some good suggestions in this thread. Thanks for the feedback.

Part Two: I won't say what I did, but let's assume that whatever you choose, East bids 4♣ which is passed back to you.

[hv=pc=n&n=sjt753hqjdk5ck653&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1h2n]133|200[/hv] IMPs. Expert partner and opps. Agreements are unusual vs unusual and double is penalty, but feel free to comment if you prefer something else. There may be a follow up question depending on answers.

1♣: Easily worth more than 12 HCP Pass: This is pretty close to 1♦ if overcalling aggressively 1♠-2♥-Dbl are all obvious after that At East's second turn I definitely would not pass. Either Rdbl or 3♥ depending on agreements. Not 3♦ which would suggest a third heart. If East redoubles, West may make a game try but you aren't going beyond 3♥ and N/S have no reason to disturb that.

Bare minimum double for me.

I think the first double is absolutely fine and normal. Obviously you aren't going to do any more though.

If weak twos are fairly disciplined then my preference in order is: shortage, (high card) feature, then Ogust. But if they are wide ranging Ogust becomes more useful.

I would be more concerned about how we will beat 4NT.

I am going to assume that West imparted no UI of any kind, though bad players often do in these situations. So East can do as they please. From West's point of view, even without the UI, the most likely reason partner bid 2♠ is that they think 2♥ is a transfer. But surely 2♠ being a super accept is still a logical alternative, even if not the most likely one. Hence 3♥ instead of 2NT is a logical alternative by West, and is the only one not suggested by the UI. Given that East passed 2NT, they had clearly realized their mistake without any benefit of UI. I see no reason they would not realize their mistake in the same way if West had bid 3♥ and pass that. If anything it would be easier. So I would assign a weighted score, probably based on some proportion of 3♠=,3♥-3 and 3♥-2. I wouldn't expect N/S to double.

Represented my country at open level first, then at junior level.

A worse problem is that it becomes dangerous for responder to compete. E.g. if you have KQxxx xx QJxx xx and it goes 1NT-(2♥) you really don't want to bid 2♠ and find partner with xx QJxx xx KQxxx.

4♠. Partner doesn't have the stopper but is offering spades as a possibility. I do like'em. For example: KQxxxx xx xx KQx. Introducing a worse spade than that into this kind of auction would be unlikely and we could still survive even so. If his side suits are worse maybe 4♦ also doesn't make.

Definitely 3♦ not pass. There will be hands that make exactly eight tricks in both denominations but surely they are well against the odds.

3♥. We could put more pressure on them at the vulnerability by bidding four hearts but partner may have stretched already and it will be hard enough for them to act over 3♥ when they don't have spades. You can also bid 2♠ sometimes with this sort of hand because opponents could convince themselves they must have a spade fit after partner corrects to hearts. But we have too many spades for that to be likely to work here.

2NT. It's too much to pass and I think there are more bad things than good that can happen if I double.

Definitely use 2♦ over 1♣. Being one step higher doesn't cost. You lose whatever you were doing with 2♦ before, which for most people is nothing that matters. Over 1♦, you can use 2♥. I don't mind losing a weak or intermediate jump shift and 3♣ as the only good raise doesn't leave enough space. You can still use 3♣ to cover some of the hand types though. If playing reverse flannery which I quite like, 2♠ has to be the main way of raising diamonds which is still ok.

I would open 2♣ not 1♥. Having opened 1♥, a non forcing 3♥ rebid is not enough when partner responds 1♠. 4♥ might be ok if it shows a hand close to a 2♣ opening, but most play it as quite a lot weaker than this. I would rebid 3♣ followed by 4♥ on the third round.

I would double, intending to pass 4♠ and convert 4NT to 5♣. If partner chooses to pass, he won't have heart shortage and I am happy to defend opposite 4243 or similar.

Dumped inverted minor raises long ago and have never regretted it. I've lost count of the number of times the other table has gone down in a silly 1NT from the wrong side while we were getting a plus score. Being one step higher on the good hands is immaterial because there is plenty of space.

Bidding spades before clubs on this hand seems like it could lead to a lot of problems. I would rather treat this as a game force and/or give up on a 4-4 spade fit. But it's possible to have methods after 1♦-2♣ where you can investigate a spade fit and still play 3♣ if partner is minimum.

Given the rudeness of the responses, I expect it will be another eight years before he posts again.

[hv=pc=n&s=sq95h2dat4cakq964&w=sat2hj83dj76532c5&n=sj764hq6dkq8cj873&e=sk83hakt9754d9ct2&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1cp1s3hd4hppp]399|300[/hv] 4♥ made easily. 5♣ is unlikely to be doubled and anyway is down only one with a successful spade guess.

North should definitely bid. It needs very little from partner for 3 of a major to make. You could also push them higher or be down 1 when they are making. Catering to partner having x xx xxxxxxx Qxx is much too pessimistic. What about all the normal hands? No blame to South whose two passes are very normal.

West's double of 3♣ is a strange choice unless there was some clue his partner might not have hearts.

North's 3NT was a slight overbid. South's 1NT was a huge overbid.