Tramticket

I'm also tempted by pass - but with two aces I opt for 1♦. I agree that this will often be of more value in defence - e.g. if opps find an eight-card fit, the suits will be be breaking 4-1. I rank: 1♦ - planning to bid 2♦ over a 2♣ response. Pass 1NT 1♥

Yes, I would always open 1♦ with a spade singleton. As Zel points out, you don't want to open 1♣ and rebid a 2♦ reverse over a 1♠ response. You probably have an overload of information by now. If so, ignore the next bit! There is another possibility for you with 15+ hands (given that you play Acol and presumably a weak NT). You can treat the hand as balanced if partner responds in your singleton and rebid no trumps. This approach needs to be used with care and discussed with partner! The danger is that partner will leap to game in your singleton expecting you to hold at least a doubleton. If the singleton is in a minor this is not usually a risk: with a singleton club, I would open 1♦ and rebid 2NT if partner responds 2♣. With a singleton heart you will always choose to rebid 1♠ - preferring to show your four-card major. The tricky case is when you hold a singleton spade. Pairs who open 1♣ with a singleton spade will usually choose to rebid 1NT (15-17) or 2NT (18-19) - this will need partner to be aware of this style and modify the continuations to allow for a possible singleton spade. This is playable, but it's not my taste and I prefer to open 1♦ with a singleton spade.

Pass looks right at these colours. 4NT second choice.

Sounds a lot better. But I'm not opening 11 point 4441 hands. Even some 12 point hands are worth a pass in my book.

You are well aware that you have constructed a specific hand and auction to make life awkward :) You could equally well construct a hand where you miss a club slam by opening 1D (opening 1C allows you to find a fit in either minor). Constructive bidding will generally work better if you open 1C. Overall I stand by the 1C opening. (Even on the hand quoted, the rebid may be easier depending upon what is promised by partner's negative double, and whether a 2D rebid promises extra values over the negative double).

Interesting example! I usually play a weak NT and a 1NT rebid shows 15+ (with a bit of flexibility in competitive auctions) so I wouldn't rebid 1NT on a 12-count with no spade stop. I'm close to passing this hand - but with two aces I guess I open 1♣ and rebid 2♣ in the hypothetical auction. Horrible!

[hv=pc=n&w=sj76532haj532dqtc&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=1dp1sp2cp]133|200[/hv] Pairs. System: 4-card majors (open major if 4-4 in Maj/min) / weak NT. (1) Do you agree with the 1♠ response? (2) How do you continue now? (if it matters, 2♥ would be 4th suit forcing to game).

With a singleton heart it is best to open 1♣. You plan to bid 1♠ over a 1♦ or a 1♥ reply. If partner responds 1NT, this should promise at least a four-card club suit, so rebid 2♣ with a minimum opening. The rule then becomes: "With 4441 and a red singleton, open one club. With 4441 and a black singleton, open one diamond".

For us, South's redouble would have been "values". We would have no agreement about the double - it seems a strange action. But our default assumption, if no specific agreement, is take-out.

You are both right of course. I know this. I've read this type of advice many times. Against good players, in a strong field, I will follow this advice. So why did I vote "no, but it's close"? The truth is that playing at the local club, I know that the field will bid 2C. I know that, even if it is wrong, the opposition won't have the methods to extract a penalty double. I also know that club players are particularly poor at defence. I will tend to get a good result when I overcall. I am sure that other I/A players follow this strategy - whether consciously or not. I am aware that this is no way to improve .... And I have discussed the standard of our two-level overcalls with partner in detail. But we still sometimes do it :(

:) Priceless!

You will get some Acol players choosing to rebid 1NT and others crossing to raise to 2S. My choice would be 1NT, but with HXX in spades I would raise.

A slightly different way of answering this question is turn it around and say "this sequence promises five cards because that is helpful and makes our subsequent bidding easier". So we arrange our system to either open or rebid no-trumps with two four-card suits. If you think of it, bridge hands can be split into three types: (1) Balanced hands - you always either bid or rebid no trumps. We could instead open a four card suit and rebid a second four-card suit - this was common in the early days of Acol. But we find it helpful to promise five cards in the first suit. (2) unbalanced hands - you will always open your longest suit, which will be at least five cards in length. (3) 4441 hands - these are sort of unbalanced, but have many of the characteristics of balanced hands. Because we find it helpful to promise that our first suit is a five card suit when we bid a second suit we bend over backwards to try and avoid making this misleading bid. There are many tactics to help us: we might open a suit and rebid no trumps when partner bids our singleton (pretending to have a balanced and that we don't quite hold). We try to always open minor with 4441 hands (I'm with Zel - opening 1♦ with a singleton club). Some will even open 1NT on occasion with a singleton. Why do we find it helpful to promise a five-card suit? It simplifies our bidding on hands like this: [hv=pc=n&s=skjt4hq75dakc7432&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1hp1sp2dp]133|200[/hv] What do we bid? Simple! 4♥

Excellent link. Thanks Zel.

Wow - the venom in this post! I agree of course that double is for penalties. But I like my bridge partners to be intelligent players who think. Thinking players do sometimes make "judgements" and will occasionally pass a forcing bid or take out their partner's penalty double. But you need to be in a partnership where both partner's trust the other's judgement and will not "Shoot opener" for exercising judgement. In the case of a double of a weak two, I would expect it to be unusual if opener takes any action except pass over the double. But there have been several recent threads where good players have advocated a more random style of pre-empting. In this style, opener may not have the single-suited hand that that you are expecting, or may have even more offence vs defence potential and judge that a vulnerable game is possible. Unlikely perhaps - but I don't like dogmatic rules in partnerships.

Small club. Yes, sorry, more missed in opening post. But clarified further down.

Yes, well done Nigel. This is more or less the line that I came up with (I ruffed clubs initially and cashed the ace of clubs later in the play). Unfortunately I got it wrong at the table and discarded a diamond on the ace of clubs. :( I seem to have a blind spot. It is easy to see that the spade honours constitute a two-card menace. It is also easy to see that the long club will be a menace against the opponent with the long clubs. But I struggled to see the possibilities in the short diamond suit. I have noticed this blind-spot before. The full hand was: [hv=pc=n&s=sq8hkqjt9853dt98c&w=s63h642d63cqt7653&n=saj52hadak4ca9842&e=skt974h7dqj752ckj]399|300[/hv]

Club lead

[hv=pc=n&s=sq8hkqjt9853dt98c&n=saj52hadak4ca9842&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=4hp7hppp]266|200[/hv] After a macho 7♥ raise from partner, I am declaring the grand slam. It might succeed with a spade finesse, or an even break in clubs, or through a squeeze ... I failed at the table, but my line lying in bed at 2am would have been better. What is the best line to maximise chances?

This is pretty much what I play with my most regular partner. On this occasion I was playing with less frequent partner - and I would not have been confident of how he would take a 2S bid.I guessed to bid 1NT, which worked OK on this occasion because partner took me out into his long heart suit, but I'm certainly seeing the attraction of a natural 2S. Thank you all for your comments.

[hv=pc=n&s=sakj983ha7dajc643&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1c(Natural%204%2B%20cards)p1s]133|200[/hv] Teams (24 board match) Pass? Or bid? If so, what?

Double - and expect to bid NT next round. This hand is too strong for an immediate NT over-call.

Vampyr: "No, according to the current EBU definition, this hand is worth five "clearcur tricks" which is the criterion, not "playing tricks" as most people assume." "Clearcut Tricks" is only a legalistic definition in the EBU blue book helping to define what it is legal in EBU land to open as an artificial two opening (such as Benji). It is not helpful as a judgement tool. "Playing Tricks" is the traditional judgement tool used in Acol for strong actions (a strong two is often described as 8 or 8.5 playing tricks, a jump rebid in your suit as 7 playing tricks). It is more useful as an aid in hand valuation, but as the OP has found out, there are multiple definitions depending upon your source.

Yes, i agree with 3♣. I would probably have bid 3♣ on the last round at match points.

Bidding 3♦ would seem to me be such a rare event, that I would think you would be "woken-up" by the 3♦ bid regardless of whether there was an alert or not.