WesleyC

I'm assuming the given hand is actually East? Assuming this is the case, I like double based on the vulnerability. FWIW I don't think partner can hold [T64 A8 T973 9852] because they would have raised to 2D.

I think 2S should be GF in this auction. Under that assumption 2NT feels better than 3S because we've got a fairly strong preference for NT and if partner is worried about hearts or clubs (say AKQxxx x Ax AJxx), they have room to investigate that over 2NT. Philking brings up an interesting question about the range of the 1NT advance. I think the range should vary based on how much room you have over the takeout double. Specifically, the more room you have to bid suits at the 1 level, the less you need to fudge a 1NT on marginal values. That would lead to ranges that looked a bit like: (1S) X (P) 1NT = 4 to 10 (1H) X (P) 1NT = 5 to 10 (1D) X (P) 1NT = 6 to 10 (1C) X (P) 1NT = 7 to 10

Put me down for 4S. Admittedly 4S on this hand is very risky and is probably a double dummy losing action, but you have to parlay that with the opponents actually punishing you. Its quite possible that the opponents end up with +150 on a layout where 4H is a lucky make.

The 3♣ opening looks obvious as South because giving up your own bidding accuracy to damage the opponents auction @ 1st/Fav is a winning plan. However at Matchpoints, I would advance the 3C opening with 3D simply because I don't want to commit to 5m on a hand where 3NT might score 630+. On this hand that might have the unplanned side effect of helping you reach 6m.

I'm playing partner to have the "sound 2H opening" that they have systemically showed. 2nd/Vul this implies some high card strength outside of hearts. In my world, 2722 shape is certainly possible but 47 shape isn't. Despite being the complete opposite of a sound preempter, 2H on partner's actual hand is not something I would perpetrate :)

Double looks pretty obvious to me. Occasionally they'll make it, but usually you'll pickup +200/500.

The problem feels impossible without more info regarding partners options. What does 3NT show? What about pass/double?

A diamond for me, stay safe.

♥J looks super clear. Given how good our hand is, partner can't have too many HCP so he must have positional hearts.

Yep you're right, 'values' is a more accurate definition than 'penalties'. The benefits of preemptive jumps is that they come up more often and can be more destructive when they do come up. In the sequence above, if I had an invitational single suiter, I would start by passing (personally I play xx as to play, bids and natural and pass as scramble so I would xx), and then bid my suit at the 3 level to suggest a hand with some interest in game. FWIW on the actual hand, after North's bids 3D (preempt) and East competes with 3H, South should definitely bid 3NT to suggest that as a final contract in case north has extras.

I don't mind 4♥ on the first round, especially given the circumstances. I don't have a strong preference between double and pass now. Although I would certainly double if I were the 4S bidder!

You should consider changing this agreement because invitational jumps through a penalty double don't make sense. If you want to invite 3NT, you can start by trying to play 1NTx (or 1NTxx) and see where the auction develops from there. A much better use for jump bids is "preemptive" (but with appropriate playing strength relative to the vulnerability). This style puts maximum pressure on the opponents in a spot where they know absolutely nothing about each other's hand shape and is a big upside of playing weak NT. Based on this hand it looks like North is already playing this style because 3D is a textbook preempt, but a poor choice if 'invitational'.

Big Diamond!

An interesting phenomenon on hands like this is that once you know partner has specifically the AK of clubs and 6322 shape, they become LESS likely to hold AK tight and more likely to also hold a small club. To describe this in another way: 9 of partner's cards are already known: ♥Kxxxxx, ♠A, ♣AK. This means there are 4 small cards which remain to be distributed among the other suits. These small cards are more likely to be distributed evenly among the suits which in turn makes it more likely partner will have a third clubs. I did a quick sim on the hand and found the approximate chance that partner holds each shape is: 2623 ~ 59% 3622 ~ 24% 2632 ~ 17% So grand-slam is at least 80%.

I've played OPs method for a few hundred hands, it's not as bad as all the posters suggest. I've gotten to penalize 2M with a 2M overcall a couple of times and the light 3m bids have found good saves and caused the opponents to miss their fit. On this hand, I don't like the 2S bid on the first round on a weak 5c suit. Even though it might be ambiguous, I prefer to start with a double on the first round (planning to double hearts again on the next round).

Some positive move seems clear. Without complex agreements 5♦ seems like a practical choice.

It's funny that that you brought up the (2S)-(4S) auction as an example where opening 1H is better. I would use the same sequence that to suggest opening 1C! I'm planning to bid 4NT over 4S, and I want partner to preference clubs. I guess the difference is that you're treating this as a one bid hand, whereas i'm mostly planning to pattern out with a second bid if the opponents compete in spades. Another point no-one has mentioned, is that constructive auctions which start: 1H 1S 2C make me feel pretty sick. If partner now bids 2H or 3NT i'm worried that we've missed a good game/slam because partner has downgraded a 'misfitting hand'. As you point out, canape majors are a basic style idea but even though I agree with that idea in principle, the playing strength and suit disparity of this hand make it worth discussing.

I'd approve of 1H if the ♣/♥ HCP were reversed but on this hand I prefer 1C. Although admittedly it is a couple of points short of a full reverse, the 0526 shape and solid suit, makes up for that. Partner should also recognize that you might shade your reverse slightly once you show a 6/5. I've stopped worrying about rebid problems on big distributional hands, because these days my opponents bid so much that the auction is rarely uncontested anyways. The most important idea is being able to pattern out your big 2-suiter accurately if you only get 2 bids to show it. As for how the auction might go - probably not well! 1C - 1S 2H - 3D (natural 5+/5+, GF) 3H - 3S 3NT - 5NT (pick a slam) 6C? - 6D? Maybe south should take a super conservative approach and just invite slam over 3NT with 4NT, but in reality his hand just feels too good.

I like North's bidding, (although not a big fan of South's). In any case, you got to the right contract! Planning the play is frustrating because it's not quite cold. My instinct after the ♣J holds is to simply play a club to the Ace at trick 2. If that stands up, you'll come home with 4 club tricks (1S, 2H, 5D, 4C) and can even afford to check for 5-0 trumps along the way and change plan if necessary. If the ♣A does get ruffed, presumably a trump comes back then you need try and sneak home with the remaining trumps 2/2 and the Qh coming down tripleton.

I agree that slam in hearts is very unlikely, but by not bidding 4C you're giving up on all the hands where partner has a club fit. Opposite [x AKxxxx xx Qxxx] or [Qx AT9xxx xx Qxx] a club slam is excellent and it will have chances opposite much less.

I think an immediate 4♠ rebid is standout, particularly at IMPs. Occasionally partner will have enough minor suit quacks to bring home 10 tricks but that isn't the main reason. Bidding 4♠ over 4♥ is such a powerful idea that it will often be right even if the contract isn't making. Most importantly, an immediate 4♠ bid has huge tactical benefits, especially at these colours. The opponents could easily forget to double, and might be tempted into a phantom sacrifice. Even strong players make mistakes, but only if give them the opportunity.

I'd assign the blame to system/agreements. Although multi 2♣ is great, it can struggle sometimes when the opps compete.

IMO double and pass are the reasonable choices. A diamond raise feels too committal on a balanced hand (especially at MPs where 3NT will often be the highest scoring contract). My first instinct is to pass at MPs, because you're not getting IMP odds on for a thin vulnerable game. However, if partner does have a minimum balanced hand, there's a decent chance they're making 140 so going 1 off in a contract our direction won't be the end of the world. So I guess I don't have a strong preference between pass and double.

♠Q looks pretty obvious to me.

I think starting with 4♣ is a much better choice than just jumping to 4♥. (Although admittedly you will usually stop in 4♥). I want to make sure I get the right lead if the opponents end up in diamonds, and if partner has a decent club fit, slam in clubs isn't out of the picture. In the real world, I expect North to have long strong diamonds, not the hand he actually holds.