WesleyC

Although I don't like to pass much, bidding on this hand feels too risky for me. Given our shape and honour distribution, it's likely that partner is short in diamonds. I would hate to score -200 (or even -500) opposite [AQJxxx Txx x Qxx] when 3H is going down. Even if partner does have length in diamonds, we will most likely only succeed in pushing the opponents into a skinny making game. Finally, you will usually be on lead against the final contract so the lead directing aspect of 3D is negligible.

The other reason you can't play for restricted choice on this layout is that LHO has an automatic falsecard holding ♠JTx. However it gets more interesting if you change the layout to AK87 opposite Q65. Now when you play a ♠A and ♠Q, if LHO plays two of the relevant honours: this IS a restricted choice situation (and actually a more powerful one than the traditional QJ case). Holding JT9, LHO could play [JT, J9, T9, 9T, 9J & TJ] however, holding only Hh they have only 2 ways [hH, Hh]. So in this case, taking the finesse is significantly better than trying to drop HHH.

6D looks normal. If partner has a doubleton spade on this auction he must have considerable extras (or the ♠A). If these opponents are likely to have raised to 3S in an 8c fit NV, then I might take a different action (and you should've mentioned that in the post!)

In answer to your question: the idea of 1.5 stops doesn't exist in modern bridge. These days, no-trump overcalls are more about describing your high card values than showing a number of stoppers.

I've played a lot of hands of bridge and i've never had an opponent psyche 2H over my strong 2C. On the time that they do manage to raise 2H into 3H into my AKQxxx i'll pass in tempo and hope that partner doubles. In reality 4H shows some big 2 suiter with 5+S.

In passout seat, it looks automatic to balance. There is certainly a risk of -300, but letting the opponents rest in 2H is an even bigger risk. However, the second 'pre-balancing' situation is very different. If you bid 3C on this hand, how is partner supposed to know that we're just messing around and not making a serious overcall. Looking at some sharp cards and a fitting club honour, he might push on to a doomed 3NT. Looking at a couple of defensive tricks, he might make a speculative double of 4H.

My first instinct (based on an offshape t/o double style) is X followed by 3C and probably 3NT next, to suggest a strong flexible hand with a marginal club stopper. However, having had this discussion, in situations like this where a low level responsive double is available to show both majors, the logical extension is that the 3C cuebid should be heavily orientated towards NT/Diamonds. If the T/O doubler is on the same page, and advances 3C with that in mind (bypassing a 4M to bid 3NT with [KQxx Kxxx Qxx Kx] for example), then it definitely feels like the best option. Maybe change the topic to "One good bid?"

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't the only advantage of gnasher's line getting an extra entry to dummy when LHO has AJx of hearts AND they work out to take the Q and return a heart before spades are ready to ruff. Otherwise the number of entries is the same?

I'd start with a responsive double, mostly in an attempt to keep the auction low. I'm planning to follow up with 3C over most continuations in an attempt to offer choice of games. WesC

Welcome to the forums kgsmith! For what its worth I disagree with johnu - although it's usually nice to include the auction/scoring it clearly isn't relevant on a hand like this (assuming the opponents just passed throughout). Crunching the numbers on the two lines: Plan A (Taking a club ruff with the ♦T) Wins automatically if clubs are very favourable (♣Q, ♣Qx or 3/3) and the diamonds are 4/2. = 54% (clubs very favourable) * 84% (diamonds 4/2) = 45.4% If clubs are xx/Qxxx with RHO holding the length, you lose only if LHO has a doubleton diamond not including the ♦3 (e.g can ruff both rounds of diamonds and still leave RHO with a trump trick). = 16% (♣xx/Qxxx) * 72% (favourable diamonds) = 11.6% If clubs are Qxxx/xx with LHO holding the length, you lose to the ♦J offside, and also to a doubleton diamond offside. = 16% (♣Qxxx/xx) * 28% (favourable diamonds) = 4.5% This line also risks an enemy ruff very occasionally (just an estimate). = -1.5% Adding these together gives the overall chance of success of ruffing a club with the ♦T at roughly 60%. Plan B (Playing three round of diamonds, then if 4/2 try the club finesse) Wins when: Diamonds are 3/3 = 35% And when Diamonds are 4/2 and the clubs are favourable (♣Q,♣Qx,♣Qxx,♣Qxxx onside) = 48%*43% = 21% The overall chance of success starting with 3 top diamonds is roughly 56%. So Nige's instinct was right - your line looks slightly better than the alternative (but not by much)!

Maybe I'm from a different planet, but a typical 3C bid for me in this auction looks more like: [xx T9x xxx AQJTx]. You've got heart tolerance, want a club lead vs 4S and are happy for partner to compete to 5C/5H with a double fit. Trying to invent a slam on this hand seems crazy.

Thanks again for such a great post. After thinking about a few of the hands overnight, I went back and redid the quiz this morning (without reading any of the analysis). The second time through 3 of my choices changed (B2 X -> 4S, B9 X -> 4S, B21 X -> P) so I might've lost the flexible double award :(. I think it would be valuable to put together a double dummy analysis of the hands in order to provide more general insight (rather than just a table result from 1 arbitrary full deal). However, in order to do that I need some help coming up with a range for 1H, P and 4H both in standard and limited openings (and also how much each call would vary based on the vul). The main part I could use some input on is determining what hands partner is going to act with (especially with a 1S overcall) and what hands constitute a 4H bid playing limited openings, because the style of these bids varies a huge amount even between top players. Any thoughts on what criteria might be suitable (or perhaps someone already has Deal 3.19 tcl script for a similar situation)?

Ben's 98% is extremely optimistic - I'd guess a Heart to the Q is closer to 90%. East holding ♥AJx and an opponent holding ♠Qxxx is one layout you can't pickup. However, your line probably won't succeed then either. Assuming you start with the ♣A and play ♠A, ♠K and a 3rd round of spades to ruff (East discarding a club). Presumably, you cross in clubs to ruff the 4th round of spades (East discards another club). Now when you cross to the ♣Q to enjoy the spades, you need East to have started with 5 clubs and West to have started with 3 - an unlikely layout. What's worse it that not drawing trumps risks going down on some layouts where the other suits are very favourable. For example, if West holds: [♠xx ♥Jxx ♦QTxxxx ♣JT] They decline to overruff the 3nd round of spades and instead pitch a club. Or [♠xx ♥Jx ♦Qx ♣JTxxxx] They overruff the spade and give partner a club ruff. None of these cases are individually very likely, but added together I think they make it clear that you should be drawing trumps on this hand.

Especially at MPs, I think you need to be allowed to rebid 2S on some hands with only 5 spades. For example passing 1NT with [QJT8x x Kx JTxxx] is just silly. "Usually 6 spades, but can be a good 5 card suit in an appropriate hand", is probably a fair description.

Is LHO really leading a singleton club vs a grandslam holding xxxx in trumps? Versus a reasonable opponent, ruffing a club must be almost 100%.

Awesome post - thanks Phil! 1. X 2. X 3. 4♠ 4. 4♠ 5. X 6. X 7. 5♦ 8. X 9. X 10. P 11. X 12. 4♠ 13. P 14. P 15. 4♠ 16. X 17 P 18. X 19. X 20. P 21. X 22. 4S 23. X

1. Your methods over a SJS seem reasonable, although over reverses I've started using the cheapest bid (even a 2M rebid) as showing the weak hand with everything else natural, promising some values. Might also be more efficient over SJSs. I'm not convinced about using 2NT then 3NT as 'doubt about strain'. If that is what the sequence means, what do you plan to do with a very weak response that just wants to play in 3NT? Does an initial jump to 3NT not show extras? In any case it feels wrong never to have supported clubs at any point, especially if partner is capable of opening very strong hands 1C (rather than 2C). 2. Again I can't really give an meaningful answer based on unfamiliarity with the methods. Is 3NT showing extra values? 3. I'd rather the double of 2D just be takeout here. Given it shows diamonds I can't find a good reason not to compete over 2H. Once I pass over 2H and partner balances 2S into the 1NT overcall I'm slightly optimistic about game chances. Although partner might just have a shapely minimum, a hand like: [AQTxxx x AKxx xx] would also be completely normal, so i'm going to advance 3S. 4. I think 5C feels right here.

For me this sequence shows Hearts, Diamonds and slam interest. Unlike Phil, I don't think it promises a spade control. For example I might bid this way with: [xxx AKJxx KQJxx void]. With less slam interest e.g. [xx AKJxx KQJxx x] I would jump to 5D instead. WesC

Well done everyone! Although Ben's 98% seems optimistic, starting with a heart to the Q and then playing on spades definitely feels like the best line. At the table West held [♠Qxx ♥x ♦Axxxx ♣JTxx]] so a similar line was necessary. Somewhat surprisingly, every declarer (including a couple of fairly strong players) went down... Rhm's idea of playing spades straight away feels very slightly worse. Because you will likely need to use a dummy entry to lead towards the Q anyways, doing so early protects against some (unlikely) layouts where the short trump holding has access to a ruff.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa3hqt8763dk8ca95&n=skj976hk95d65ckq3&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=p1hp1sp2hp4hppp]266|200[/hv] West leads the ♣J. Plan the play!

With a singleton spade, a 7c suit and 2 aces, I haven't got a problem with 3H by north (although I understand it might not be everyone's cup of tea). The first double by south is bizarre holding KQx of hearts. Why not raise to 4H in the known 9/10c fit? Once partner rebids 4H over your first double and you still have undisclosed KQx support, i'd be more likely to make a slam try in hearts than try and defend 4S.

I'm interested (and a little surprised) that so many people are bidding 2H on this hand. Although I admit that 2H will often work out fine, it makes showing 4 card Spade support later in the auction almost impossible, which might cause partner to misjudge the slam potential of a hand that has weak trumps. For example playing 2/1, the auction will often develop: 1S - 2H 2S - 4D Which I prefer to play suggests a hand with 3514 or 3613 shape but never 4612. For me this hand is also too strong for an immediate 4D splinter (which would show a minimum GF), so I would start with an artificial 2NT G/F raise, planning to subsequently show diamonds shortage.

The main point to take from this discussion is that it really doesn't matter whether you open a hand like this 1S or 2C. There isn't a right or wrong answer, you should simply agree a sensible style with your partner and then stick with that.

I wouldn't bid 1D. Given I did, it feels much safer to pass after the reopening double, trusting partner to rescue us if they try and penalize.

I would double at IMPs, although I think its a tossup at MPs.