nigel_k

Is it normal to splinter with a 4 card major? That's one of the things I wanted to find out. Anyway, what would you do if it starts 1♣-1♦-1♠?

One thing that was useful in the old archive was the file size. There are quite a few that are around 150 bytes, I guess because the room either crashed or had to be restarted due to incorrect setup. I could avoid downloading these by looking at the file size but the new page doesn't have it. This is just minor though.

We lost a Swiss teams last night after leading going into the last round, mainly because of three slam (or not) hands. The third one is below: [hv=d=w&w=sakq9xxhxdkxcqjxx&e=stxhqxdqjxxcakxxx]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Bid these hands. North overcalls 2♥. Unfortunately you are not playing Kickback though perhaps you will consider doing so after this hand.

We lost a Swiss teams last night after leading going into the last round, mainly because of three slam (or not) hands. The second one is below: [hv=d=s&v=e&w=sa8xxhxdaq9xxxcak&e=sxhakjxxdk10xxc109x]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] How would you bid after South opens 2♠ (weak)?

We lost a Swiss teams last night after leading going into the last round, mainly because of three slam (or not) hands. The first one is below: [hv=d=w&w=saktxhxdakxxckqtx&e=sqxxhxxxdqjtxxcax]266|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] How would you bid after West opens 1♣? (Obviously a 1♦ opening is also possible but then it would be a different and probably easier problem)

I played symmetric relay (the relay structure not the opening bid structure) for a number of years including internationally and highly recommend it. I don't know the ultimate club that well, but it is hard to even conceive of a relay structure being better than symmetric. Symmetric relay works with strong club and either transfer openings and a minor oriented 1♠, or with Precision style 5 card majors and a catchall 1♦. You can play it just over the 1♣ opening but you'll probably want to use it everywhere. The relays over 1♣ can benefit from some adjustments to maximize the chance of relayer, not responder, becoming declarer. Let us know how you get on!

This is not something that can be decided by the letter of the laws alone because there's always going to be a gray area between 'system' and 'style'. There are two principles of interpretation I would apply: 1) There should be a presumption of legality, not illegality. Therefore the word 'system' should be interpreted narrowly and the words 'style and judgment' should be interpreted broadly. 2) When there is ambiguity, the purpose of the law should be a major deciding factor. The purpose of this law is to prevent situations such as playing transfers when the pro opens 1NT but not when the client opens 1NT. In the present situation, it is perfectly possible to play that 1♦ is usually 4+, 1♣ is usually 3+ and Westmagic hands make a judgment call. This partnership can be viewed as having a difference of opinion in exercising that judgment, even if one player judges that 1♣ on a two card suit will always work out better than 1♦ on a three card suit, and the other player judges the opposite. Furthermore, I don't see that the purpose of the law can be furthered in any way whatsoever by applying it to this situation. So I would rule there is no infraction here.

I would treat this as 2245 so open 1♣ then raise 1♦ to 2♦, or rebid 2♣ over 1♥ or 1♠. For those determined to bid NT, this is easily a strong NT, not a weak NT. Opening 1♣ intending to rebid 1NT will only gain when partner responds 1NT. Otherwise you'll still bid NT from the wrong side and will have understated your values.

Given they changed a previously existing rule, there's every reason to think they thought carefully about the meaning of the wording in the new rule compared to the old one. I think the initial poster is correct and this change clearly, and IMO intentionally, reduces the options available to a player who has UI compared to the previous rule.

Double. And I am usually the one bidding my suit when most other people are doubling.

If 2♥ can be a fairly ordinary five card suit, then it should be somewhat constructive. If partner can raise hearts, he'll have short clubs which is bad opposite our hand. I agree with the reasoning of Peter Gill and others but would say this hand doesn't qualify on strength.

I'd prefer the other hand is not posted at all. It isn't really relevant to the problem and it tends to end the discussion early because people will be reluctant to suggest something that would have failed on the actual deal. The only reason to do so is if the actions taken by both hands are questionable and you're not sure which to post as the initial problem hand.

XX. I think this is the wrong hand for 1NT. I'd be surprised if 1NT plays better than 2 of a minor (unless partner bids 1NT himself) and he may well pass expecting more in hearts and less in the minor suits.

East 80%. The hand is worth 3♠. Yes, it's a limit raise but under pressure must include hands worth only 2♠ that have maximum values or extra distribution. This clearly qualifies. A hand at the upper end of a limit raise will bid 4♠ to take some of the strain off 3♠, but essentially they have taken up space so it's normal that the bids still available must now cover a wider range of hands. Even after passing 3♥ I would still bid 4♠ over 4♥ with East but that is less clearcut. I'll give West 20% as 4♠ is an option over 4♥, though much more dangerous than bidding with East.

I bid 3♥ but am not certain it is better than double. Would not pass.

Firstly, if you play to win, you are probably best not to psyche at all, ever. Having said that, the best time to psyche is at pairs against strong opponents, just because you stand to gain more and lose less compared to letting them do their thing. Also, at pairs, don't wait until you are white vs red. Usually the vulnerability won't save you when things go wrong. The main effect is on believability - a vulnerable psyche is more likely to be convincing. There are a couple of situations where a psyche has a better chance of working: A 1NT opening or overcall, because partner usually won't bid much over it especially when they double. You probably won't fool anyone but at least it takes them out of their comfort zone if they can't profitably double your runout and instead have to try to find their own best spot. If RHO opens a multi 2♦, and you have a weak two bid in spades, try jumping to 4♥. Quite often LHO will bid 4♠. If this works, try to suppress laughter until opponents have left the table. Jumping in hearts when you have spades works in other situations too.

Kaplan/Rubens evaluates it to 9.8 HCP. When you also consider the preemptive and lead directional value, it's really a no-brainer isn't it? Anyway if one of my small clubs was the queen I would bid 3♠ now.

lol. You must play vs. some tough beginners. Even if you attach more weight to the choice of forum for posting the problem than I do, opponents needn't be beginners. Anyway, we know one of them is doing something strange and bidding a short suit followed by redouble is hardly rocket science. I'm also not sure there is a better line even if you assume West has bid 2♣ on K10xx.

I would have passed the double though if my partner has a penalty double at this vulnerability then probably West has psyched and will run. I would not double with North though. In the play, we need to start by thinking about what West has for his 2♣ bid. There are three possibilities: 1) He has bid 2♣ to play with a four card suit, probably with a top honour 2) 2♣ is a psyche and he is planning to redouble, maybe with 3442 shape or just a five card diamond suit. 3) He has five clubs and East has an offshape three suited NT opener with stiff ace of clubs. It would be a poor 11 but people do that sometimes. Know the opponents tendencies would be helpful because one of them has done something a bit strange no matter what. You need to know about their runout mechanisms after 1NT-X and also leads because you want to know who has the fourth heart. Probably RHO has it if they lead seconds. I can't see a way to combine all the chances but I think scenario 2 seems most likely so I win the heart in dummy and play a spade to the jack then a small spade from both hands. Win the heart return. Now I have to choose between playing for 3-3 spades plus setting up a club, or going for an extra trick in diamonds. I'll probably do the former but would need to be at the table to know for sure.

I would pass with South. Slam is good opposite KQxxxxxx x xx Ax but there are plenty of hands with two key cards where it's not great, and you could do down at the five level. If partner is liable to open 4♠ on a wide range of hands, the odds might be with bidding though. I can't claim any vast depth of experience in bidding hands with two voids, but would open at the one level with North.

Pass, in tempo. Probably 2♠ was the last making contract for either side. There's not such a high chance they will bid 4♥ and make it that I'm willing to turn a likely plus into a minus just to obstruct them.

I can't see redouble leading to anything better than -800 so probably few matchpoints are at stake. It is certainly believable that North might take a view and pass a takeout double in this situation. He expects 500 at least and with suits not breaking, slam may not make or he may collect 1100. However I am skeptical they have a firm agreement that double is takeout in this situation. Did anyone ask South what the N/S agreement was about doubles generally? One problem with the regulation that no alert means takeout is that there will be times when there is simply no agreement. I think it's asking too much of people to expect them to alert when they have no agreement - that just goes against human nature. This could well be one of those times, or maybe they have some vague agreement that double is for takeout unless it's obviously a penalty situation. This is very playable and I do it myself but there can be misunderstandings. So even knowing for certain what they have agreed will not tell us for sure whether they should have alerted the double. I would prefer an regulation that both takeout and penalty doubles are not alerted, but other doubles (eg DONT or support doubles) are alerted. This is equally simple and more practical and useful, in my opinion.

Low heart. You need to lead aggressively because declarer will want to discard losers on dummy's winners. A trump is wrong and a club is unlikely to set up winners. You won't find partner with short clubs when he couldn't act over 1♣. So it has to be a heart or a diamond. I prefer a heart because I have an honour and the three card suit means any tricks we have are more likely to be cashing. Leading from a jack is poor as a passive lead but is a better shot than four small cards when you need to make an aggressive lead. With an entry there is no reason to lead the jack rather than a low card and the jack could confuse partner.

If my opponents wanted to do this, I would really hope they were allowed to. It sounds like a recipe for frequent disaster with a miniscule upside.

4♠. Not close at all, as others have said.