nigel_k

Is 2♠ pass or correct? If so, I would do that. It might not play very well if it goes all pass but I will still be in a better position than if I had bid 3♣. By inference I am showing a hand worth a raise to at least 3♣ so partner may choose to compete with 4♣ if they raise hearts.

Is 2♠ pass or correct? If so, I would do that. It might not play very well if it goes all pass but I will still be in a better position than if I had bid 3♣. By inference I am showing a hand worth a raise to at least 3♣ so partner may choose to compete with 4♣ if they raise hearts.

Sorry, my logic was faulty and I managed to exclude all 5332 shapes for partner which obviously affects it a lot. After fixing and rerunning I have it making 5536/10000 times which is almost the same as what Wayne got.

The full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=st72haqj6532dkc82&w=skqj43h97daj7ckjt&n=s9865ht8dt953cq97&e=sahk4dq8642ca6543&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=4hdp]399|300[/hv] I'm not sure this proves anything. I had the pleasure of putting down dummy in 5♣ and watching them start with three rounds of hearts. 6♣ or 6NT makes from my side. Partner's double may be questionable but I thought it was ok.

Is it 20-21 or 21-22?

I'm really not seeing it at all. A low club looks normal and there appear to be a number of layouts where any other return will let it make.

I would pass and expect to get 500 more often than not.

From a sample of 10,000 hands, it made 3962 times. Also, slams make more often double dummy than at the table, as declarer has most of the decisions. Though it is easier when the defence have given you a blueprint.

If you do get this sort of auction and hold a limit raise, just bid game. 3♠ cannot be a limit raise under any methods because you may wish to bid it with only two trumps. Constructive raises work very well and the upside is huge. Having a five point range for a single raise and making partner guess whether to make a game try is no different in principle than having a five point range for a 1NT opener and making responder guess whether to invite.

[hv=pc=n&e=sahk4dq8642ca6543&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=4hdp]133|200[/hv] Expert partner, no special agreements. Your call.

Even supposing that inviting is contrary to your religious beliefs, there are several unstated assumptions here: 1) Opener never has a super accept. In reality they sometimes do and those hands have to be excluded because you'll reach game under any approach. 2) Game either makes or is down one undoubled. Sometimes it is down two and/or doubled. 3) Opener has what a computer would call 15-17 balanced. In practice people upgrade 14 or 17 HCP hands a lot more than they downgrade 15 or 18 HCP hands. So the set of hands for opener in real life is weaker than the ones in your simulation So if the simulation does have game making 41.62% of the time, that suggests to me that the best action at the table is either transfer and pass or invite.

North's double is eccentric but South's pass is clearly worse. Having said that, I can easily imagine N/S conceding more than 140 on these cards.

If opener cue bids they have diamonds. Otherwise they bid either 4♥ or 4NT. Since opener is narrowly limited in strength and didn't super accept they won't often have a hand with hearts that really has to cue bid. And you will have the big advantage of always knowing what trumps are. If opener does happen to have a hand that has really improved, e.g. Axx AKx KQJ Axxx they can bid 5♥.

I like 2♣ strong and others weak. There may be slightly better alternatives, but not much better. And most people can more profitably put effort into other areas of their system.

The exact choice depends how you play Bergen but I would evaluate this as the 11-12 option not the 7-10 option. There will be a big difference between AQx KQxxx Kxx xx and Kxx KQxxx xx AQx opposite, but we can't do much about that.

This is too hard for me and I would probably end up defending 5♦ after never mentioning hearts. Double of 2♣ is majors but I wouldn't do it with 6-4, e.g.: P-2♣-2♠-2NT,3♠-4♦-4♠-5♦,all pass Yes, South can bid 4♥ instead of 4♠ but unless partner is on lead I find these kind of bids mostly help opponents.

I definitely would. With this much shape and at this vulnerability, there will very often be a cheap save and it will be hard to act later. It may go 1♦-3♦-5♦ or even 1♦-3♦-3NT and you are fixed. I would consider it close (but still do it) if we were vulnerable, or non vul if only 5-5. The hands to be careful on are ones like Axxxx Kxxxx xx x where we have defence and may go for a number when their contract doesn't make.

Now that his head has literally exploded the game was going to become a lot tougher anyway.

4♣. If partner fits clubs, we could be too low but I can't really bid more than 4 with a suit like this. I don't pass or open 1 with these hands.

Definitely bid 7. We should have bid 4♣ instead of 3♠ and since we didn't, partner will not expect this much.

I know people open lighter than they used to, but surely this is better than a limit raise?

I don't think Jonestown had much to do with religion either.

Some people in this thread need to make more of an effort to see things from the other side's perspective. There are plenty of intelligent and reasonable people who believe in god. I don't agree with them but am aware I could be wrong. I actually thought Fluffy was referring to the guy killing himself at the end. An atheist would think they could avoid punishment by doing that but a religious person probably wouldn't. Mikeh blamed religion for a whole list of things. But when Fluffy suggested atheism might be a factor in the shooting, he went off about "religious nuts, who blame people like me for things like this". Anyone who cannot see the problem here needs to seriously stop and take a breath. Religion often gets dragged into disputes that are really about something else. Israel/Palestine and Sunni/Shia are prime examples of that. For most of history, nearly everyone was religious, so of course people would try to claim god was on their side, no matter what the actual argument was about. If you look at the period since atheism became widespread, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot are among the worst mass murderers, even without including Hitler. Not that this makes atheists like me any less moral than anyone else. But I won't be getting up on my high horse any time soon.

All non forcing. In each case you can jump or bid the fourth suit with a better hand. Sometimes bridge is allowed to be simple. Case 2 would be forcing if playing 2♠ over 1♦ as weak.

There is no need for responder to redouble just because they are in trouble. He can pass then double for penalties later. You'll sometimes get only 570 instead of 840, but the downside of tipping them off and giving them extra options is more frequent and may be more costly. There are two possible meanings for redouble: 1. Asking partner to cooperate in penalizing. I think this is the normal meaning. Here I would double if they bid clubs and pass otherwise. 2. Rescue, probably a two suiter. This is definitely not standard and less useful after a second seat preempt.