Tramticket

You lack ambition. Bid 6♣ :)

Is it me? You don't seem to hold the diamond 3, the club 5 or the club 6! Are BOSTON leads a code for leading a card from someone else's hand?! :)

(Assumption: opening bidder, all non-vul) Style matters here. What will partner expect for a 4♣ opening? Or 1♣? Or pass? All of these actions are possible and might work better - a lot depends on who holds the spades! "Which bid would you never take?" - I wouldn't bid 3♣

This is our partnership agreement - but in practice, it doesn't come up often and we are still at the "I hope that partner will remember" stage with it. We have no experience of declarer gaming it.

Apart from a weak NT, what is you basic system? I might respond 2C rather than 1S - but it depends on what a 2C response means for you? 1D-2C-2NT-3S-3NT (or 4S) is a possible sequence for us. I think that all roads lead to a failing game.

For us: 2NT rebid after 2-over-1 = 15-18 Balanced (or maybe a general forcing bid e.g. on a hand too strong for 1♠-2♥-4♥) 3NT rebid after 2-over-1 = 19-20 Balanced (we are relaxed not having the space to look for a major when we are this strong) 2NT Opening 21-22 (we used to include this strength in our multi, but we now prefer to play a weak-only multi) 2♣ Opening then 2NT = 23-24 Edit: the problem with "1♠-2♥-2N is GF and unlimited in weak NT Acol" is that the range becomes too great - what strength do you need to invite slam after a 2NT rebid?

OP is playing Acol. An easier hand if playing 2/1 I agree. No, 1NT shows 6-9 in Acol. Partner will never believe that we have a strong 10-count with three-card support and a good five-card holding in the other major! No, a 2 spade rebid is not forcing in standard Acol. Partner will often bid again but there is no obligation. No, a 2 spade rebid does not promise a six-card suit in Acol – imagine a minimum hand with 5 spades and 4 diamonds (5242 maybe) – There is no other bid than 2 spades. I have. With five spades and four hearts, I will often have a splinter available and since partner has guaranteed a five-card heart suit I would expect this 1S-2H-4H auction to show a three-card holding much of the time. The auction does consume a lot of space but it has conveyed some inferences about the hand: strong enough to play in game opposite a 10-count, but not strong enough to bid a forcing 2NT followed by 4H or 4S. So, would I ace-ask after this sequence? I’m not sure … This is the wisest thing that has been said so far in this thread. I find it very difficult to comment objectively on what I would have done when I can see all four hands.

There is a lot to be said for the simple auction 1C-1S-3NT, where 3NT is to play based on a long running club suit.

This is just wrong. A reverse has been a one-round force in Acol since before I was born (a long time ago). A jump shift (e.g. 1H-1S-3D) is and always has been, forcing to game, but is not a reverse. A high reverse occurs after a 2-over-1 response (e.g. 1S-2D-3C) was traditionally a one-round force, but would now be played as game forcing by just about every Acol player - because the standard for a 2-over-1 has risen, even in Acol!

I might have valued the South hand in the 12-14 range and opened 1NT. But I wouldn't critisise a pass. I might have over-called an aggressive, multi-Landy 2♣ or ASPTRO 2♦ at pairs, but never at teams at this vulnerabity. I am not keen on using ASTRO with a weak hand and a four-card anchor suit so I would definitely pass with your methods and couldn't critisise a pass with any methods. The idea of using a 2♣ Stayman bid followed up by 3♣ to show a weak hand with clubs was certainly part of old-fashioned Acol. In the days before transfers, there was no other way to make a weakness takeout with clubs. But even in those days, the advice was that you should only do this with a six-card or (better) a seven-card suit since you were proposing to play at the three level instead of the one level. The advice was also to take such an escape with a very weak hand, but sit 1NT with the balance of the points. This action might be part of their methods, but I think that Zelandakh is probably right - they are very poor players.

1. It is partly a matter of style. I don't like lying to partner about my shape. But yes, I have sometimes done this and probably would on the given hand. A reasonable alternative on the example hand, is to open 1♥ and rebid hearts - this heart suit is playable opposite a singleton. I think that I would rather pass and come in later with a two-suited over-call than reverse on an 11-count. 2. If you reverse without high-card strength, it will be difficult for partner to judge whether to play or defend if the auction becomes competitive. I like to promise 17 HCPs with a reverse after a one-level response (e.g. a natural non-forcing 1NT response if that is part of your system). I might borrow a point or two for shape, but an 11-count is never a reverse for us.

How do you value the South hand - and particularly the spade holding? It looks to me like a holding that is far more useful in defence than playing the hand. This South hand does not look like an invitational hand to me. I also think that the double dummy prediction of 11 tricks is very optimistic in real life play.

Our 4♥ opening at these colours might look like: 2 QJ1095432 432 2. Given this, I wouldn't dream of opening 4♥ on the OP hand. If I were playing Benji 2 bids, I might consider a 2♣ opening since this looks like an eight-playing-trick hand. But in the absence of this tool, this is an obvious 1♥ opening. I wouldn't do this even opposite a passed hand partner, my partner will never believe that I have two certain defensive tricks and might take a phantom sacrifice. I can construct hands where a slam is possible opposite partner's passed hand!

I wasn't even advocating 1H over a double, you seem to be putting a lot of words in my mouth. But now you ask, it doesn't promise a lot and nor does it deny spades.

Really? North has a 4-count, a void in partner's suit suggesting a misfit and four cards in the opponent's suit. I would be passing.

The simple answer is that 4D it is whatever you have agreed it to be. As already stated, many (particularly in the US) will play this as a "Texas Transfer" to hearts. There are other options including my preferred option of using 4♣/4♦ as transfers to hearts and spades respectively or maybe an ace-asking (Minorwood) bid. I see little need to pre-empt opposite even a weak 1NT opening - but I suppose that this is possible A 2D response is a transfer for almost everyone and we play a 3D response as slam invitational in diamonds. I don't think that Standard Acol has this bid defined. In Standard Acol 4♣ is probably Gerber and 4♥/4♠ are natural.

Umm. I don't understand this. I made no comment about 4H. Edit: I keep looking at this and can't see any auction where North is proposing to be declarer in 4H after the auction starts (1D), 1S ... I would love to see your suggested route to this contract??!

Pass. Partner might have a very strong hand and leap to game if you respond here. (Unless you have agreed with partner that a jump to 2S is very weak - not without agreement).

A simple 1♠ for me. I don't think that double followed by bidding the spade suit is right - it is a bit light on strength (with the ♦K downgraded and seven of my points in the short suits) and it is a two-suiter, With one partner I play that 2♦ would show a two-suiter in specifically spades and clubs. This would be perfect!

Here are my thoughts arranged in the order of my mother's date of birth: WHAT A SILLY POST.

Yes, second one in recent day: (See here). Can I advise posters to use the hand diagram (spade symbol with two red bars to left and right).

A low-level double is not penalties when they have agreed a suit. So what is a double? I don't have any agreement that it shows trump support - maybe that would be useful, but we have only agreed that a game try applies after suit agreement. We play a weak NT and I would expect south to double with (say) A10 97 AK82 KQ732 to show values. How strong is our actual hand? Again, playing a weak NT, we would open 1NT with A107 932 A98 KJ72, so for us the OP hand is close to a minimum. I think that I have an easy 3♠ bid.

Pass for me. Competing 5 over 5 is rarely a good idea and on this hand partner has specifically warned you not to bid on.

It was you who mentioned the possibility of a Gambling 3NT. I was just pointing out that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what a gambling 3NT is. I doubt that you will find many who would choose to lead from three small in a major rather leading the five-card suit headed by the AK. But if I take you at face value, that you bid 3NT because west wouldn't lead it's suit, there is still a significant risk that the west computer will lead it's partner's suit and you will still go down quickly. And no, I don't think that playing bridge with a computer partner and two computer opponents is real bridge. At best it is practice for bridge. Having said that, if you enjoy it, good luck practicing.

3NT is a poor contract and the fact that GIB can't make the obvious lead might lead to a good score, but doesn't really improve any objective assessment of the contract. A gambling 3NT would not be appropriate here, even if it were part of the system. In addition to promising a solid seven or eight-card suit, a gambling 3NT (as generally played) denies aces and kings in side suits, with the expectation that partner will pull to 4m without all three suits stops. If you opened 3NT, partner would bid 4♣ and you would correct to 4♦ - not a great contract. I don't mind the 1NT opening if playing 15-17, but jumping to 3NT in response to Stayman was a wild action that got lucky.