nigel_k

Agree with 2♣. It suggests more high card values but 3♣ could be a much worse hand and nothing else appeals unless you have another agreed treatment for this hand type. 1♦ followed by 3♣ doesn't help matters. Don't agree with 2♦. If it's balanced North should have opened 1NT, otherwise it qualifies for 2♥ showing an unbalanced hand. I don't think there should be any middle ground that is too unbalanced for 1NT and too balanced to rebid 2♥. After that it depends on the meaning of 3♣. If 3♣ is nonforcing or suggests a minimum then I think South's sequence is ok. If 3♣ is unlimited then I would just keep bidding clubs at minimum level with South and eventually cue bid 4♠ if the opportunity arises. Splinter or anything else is too much.

Americans don't watch soccer because they have better choices. Other countries don't have interesting sports to watch (except basketball) so they are more inclined to watch soccer. Occam's razor etc. Though this doesn't explain Americans watching golf or car racing.

You need to investigate more. The formula can't be that strange if nine students used it and they didn't all copy someone's answer because they got different results. But I would be inclined to give full marks to anyone who got the right answer and only look at their methods for the purpose of giving partial marks to people who got it wrong.

Agree with 2♥. It has more defence than partner will expect but offbeat preempts in third seat often work. 3♥ is too much. 1♥ is ok but I prefer to preempt and make them guess. There should be an analogous rule to Hamman's law that if one of your options is a preempt, then choose that one.

Surprising how often these B/I problems turn out to be difficult. They could have led from Hxx or maybe West is trying to trick us. The likelihood of this will depend on the bidding to some extent. An alternative line is to hold up twice in spades or win A♥ if West switches. This gains if spades are 3-5 and West has ♣A. It loses if East switches to a heart away from the king which would not be an easy defence to find when holding HHxx in the suit partner led. It also loses if East has KJ of hearts and West ♣A and he switches after the second spade. Maybe we can avoid the second losing scenario by winnng ♠A at trick two only if East returns the five since it would be dangerous and unusual for East to falsecard in that situation. Overall I think this is for from obvious.

2NT-3♠ (MSS) 3NT-4♣ (6+ clubs and at least mild slam try) At which point I think North has enough to keep bidding until 6♣ is reached. I agree with Gerben's start but I think South has done enough once he bids 4♣. I wouldn't regard a 4♥ cue bid by North as particularly encouraging - you should usually cue bid since partner is unlimited and bidding 4NT takes up an entire level. I would only bid 4NT with an unsuitable minimum. If it was a bidding challenge of course North would know 6♦ must be right and would just bid 4♦ over 3♠.

You need an agreement about cue bids when they have bid two suits because I don't think there is anything like a standard treatment. If 3♠ is a running club suit and asking for a stopper then I quite like my hand. Normally I'd bid 3♥ not 2♥ with this hand type but it's a bit too good with AK of hearts and a singleton, and even better if partner has long clubs. But bidding 5♣ would be too much and I would just make a (forcing) pass now. Partner will usually bid with spade shortage and I have defence if he doubles. LHO could be semi-serious with diamonds and partner something like xxx x Ax AKQxxxx.

Who would actually return the nine if they started with K987xxx? This would give away the blockage and isn't believable.

I agree that long clubs with North is more likely because South could have ducked, and if North does have long clubs he is more likely to have ♥J than ♥K. But that line does involve guesswork and you could go down with clubs 3-3 all the time. North may also discard ♥J and you have to guess if he started with KJ or Jx. A possible alternative is to discard down to stiff Q of hearts at the end, making whenever clubs are 3-3 or the long club hand has KJ of hearts. I don't know if this is better but I prefer lines that avoid guesswork so I can sleep well afterwards.

Declarer has eight tricks so partner will need to have ♣K. If he has KJ or better there is no play so the key situation is K with partner and QJ with declarer. The only way declarer might not take the club finesse is if he places me with ♠A and ♣K and plays for a strip squeeze. I am marked with seven hearts so if declarer decides I have three spades then I can have only one club and the strip squeeze won't work. So I need him to play me for 2722 which is conveniently the only shape where a three heart opening with this much in high cards would make any sense. That means discarding one (encouraging) spade and then hearts, finally pitching a club on the last diamond. If declarer decides to play me for Ax K109xxxx xx Kx then he'll play a club to the ace on which I'll pitch my small spade and we take the last four.

You need an agreement but 1NT is not an option and I'd like to have some diamonds when I pass this. Either redouble or bid 1♥, depending on which is most likely to lead to us playing in a major rather than partner introducing a poor club suit. I'd also prefer to open 1♣ on this hand type. This wouldn't make the problem go away but would affect how you deal with it.

You don't need 18 for a double raise if balanced. I would raise to just 2♥ on your second example but would bid 3♥ if the hand was a bit stronger. Certainly any 17 is a double raise. Also I don't think the difference in playing strength between your two examples is so great that it's a major problem bidding 2♥ on both.

If not playing for the squeeze, I still prefer my alternative line: win trick 3 in dummy, ruff a spade, play another trump to dummy then ♠Q pitching ♣J. If the ♣Q was stiff (and that seems to be a key assumption in your analysis) you make regardless of the location of the ♦Q. If East produces another club you can still finesse in diamonds.

I like this too. The first step ask for shortage also means you are revealing information about dummy, not declarer, which is good.

This sequence is wide ranging. The problem is that your suggestion would make it even wider. I'm very happy to pass simple preference with 15 HCP knowing that we have at most 25 and no fit. With 16 and an otherwise fairly average 5-4 hand I'm not happy but still feel that pass is the percentage action. Partner also knows the situation and can stretch to bid 2NT with a good 10. But this all goes out the window if partner could have 3 card support and as many as 9 HCP. Hands with three card support are much better than hands without it. When responder does have the 5-3 hand , there's no problem raising if opener has 4-5 and enough for a game try as you can still get back to spades. If opener passes 2♥ then you also gain quite often because the raise makes it harder for them to get into the auction with their minor suits, compared to responding 1♠. Just getting to play the hand at a low level could be good enough.

Pass, not forcing. It's quite unlikely partner has a doubleton spade, but even assuming he has a singleton 4♠ and 5♥ will both be down a lot of the time. I don't mind if he passes, doubles, or bids 5♥ and have no strong opinion myself about which will work best. I don't mind 5♥ but I wouldn't double with a hand like this and would expect partner to pass the double unless he has a spade void or otherwise unusual shape.

The standard meaning is weak with long hearts but I'd rather play it as constructive, i.e. 8-11 with five hearts. Obviously I might still bid it with a bit less and a decent six card suit but I'll have to rebid my suit if partner continues. If playing Bart then this only applies when opener rebids 2♦.

I would just raise to 2♥. The hand is worth 2♥, not 3♥. If you're counting HCP plus one for the doubleton, then you want at least 11 total with three trumps or 10 total with four trump. There is nothing special about this hand that would count as an exception. Once you've decided the hand is worth 2♥, you don't want to respond 1♠ or 1NT because if partner bids 2 of a minor, a simple preference to 2♥ could be made on a much weaker hand. If you did have a three card limit raise, I don't understand why 1NT followed by 3♥ would be a better choice than 1♠ followed by 3♥. They both show a limit raise and 1NT runs the risk of losing spades or playing in 1NT if it is semi-forcing only. Partner could pass 1NT with 4522 shape for example. With your partner's hand I would have bid 2NT only, not 3NT. Either way your hand should bid 4♥ next.

From a simulation I got 54.8% for the finesse and 74.1% for A then Q. If we assume East has at least one club and West's spades are worse than Qxxxxxx then it is 57.1% for the finesse and 70.5% for A then Q.

When I played it, we used 1♣ as semi-positive (7-11) and 1♦ as negative (0-6). So you are at the same level with a positive as you would be after a 'strong' club opening, but with the advantage of of the semi-positives being able to relay at the same level as positives after P-1♣-1♦. And the other advantages of semi-positives. It's also much better to be a step lower after the 1♣/♦ openings. The continuations after 1♦ showing hearts or 1♥ showing spades are a bit cramped. Certainly you don't do it expecting to gain from the fert opening's preemptive value or by preventing the opponents using their system. You expect a net loss from those cases to be compensated by gains when opening with pass, 1♣ or 1♦.

Meh, I think you're giving people too much credit. I like my suggested line even with Helgemo or Meckstroth on my left, but that's just me. Maybe I give people too little credit, but I feel really confident against people less than that level (like myself) I think it's a good line. I agree. Even if the opponent is thoroughly familiar with squeeze technique they could easily get it wrong. It's much harder to see these things from the defender's point of view. And since you are increasing your chances from around 50% to nearly 100% if they don't play a diamond, the odds are pretty good.

If you win trick 3 and concede a club, you are just about cold on a double squeeze unless they switch to a diamond. Otherwise you can win trick 3 in dummy, ruff a spade, play another trump to dummy then ♠Q pitching ♣J. This works if ♣Q was stiff and you have the diamond finesse in reserve. I would choose one of those, probably the former against almost anyone. I don't know what your plan was after winning the trump in hand and playing another one.

I'm confused. If the 3♥ bidder is my partner I bid 4♥ the first time. If I am the doubler I would have bid 3NT instead.

After you put in the queen, did declarer play partner for 9753?

Still, East might as well have bid 3♠, non? I agree East should have bid 3♠ only, partner could be 3-6. Actually, psyching a game try when you intend to bid game anyway is almost too easy. Nothing can really go wrong and opponents are quite often on a guess as to what to lead and your game try will/should influence them a lot. In a regular partnership obviously you would tell them it could a psyche but in a casual partnership it is one of the best times to psyche. West doesn't deserve to be in a list of the stupidest psyches.