WesleyC

With such a great concentration of HCP in Diamonds and Clubs, I'd happily give preference to 3D over 3C. Although you're a diamond short, if partner is looking to bid a slam they certainly won't be disappointed with your hand. 1H - 2D 2H - 3C 3D... Which would certainly get you to 5D at IMPs. At Match-points you still might wind up in 3NT. WesleyC

Assign the blame: [hv=d=s&v=n&n=s963hjt4dj5cqjt95&w=s8hakq953dq96c743&e=skth8762dat42ca86&s=saqj7542hdk873ck2]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] The auction was: (1S) 2H (P) 2S (3D*) 3H (3S) 4H (4S) P (P) X AP *This pair play Good/Bad 2NT. 2NT here would show an undisclosed strong 2 suiter. Any blame to assign? Wes

Peter: Isn't it about time you put together your own bridge book? I offer my services as proof reader when you do :) Hamdi: My favourite is "Bridge with the Blue Team" by Pietro Forquet. It isn't the most instructive book, but if you want to be impressed by pure bridge genius, it is a must read.

Cue-bid forcing 1R isn't standard here in Australia, I think the style was imported from Scandinavia perhaps? In terms of frequency this style of responding to a t/o double makes sense. 10/11 counts opposite a double come up fairly often while strictly G/F hands aren't so common (and aren't difficult to deal with anyway). A major benefit is more tightly defining your jumps to the 2 level (almost always a 5c suit). On hand 2 in the problem 2S isn't too much of a stretch because the spades are decent but on a hand with worse spades like xxxx Kx KJxxx Ax you can get yourself into trouble when the opponents compete.

3H. Partner might still be looking for strain at this point. My hand is good, but still minimum so I'll tread water with the cheapest available bid.

1. 4C. Converting 4H to 4S to show 4S and longer Diamonds. 2. 2C. Forcing one round, showing about 10+. Planning to pass 2S or raise 2D to 3D. I expect partner to with more than a minimum T/O dbl to show some life with 3C or a jump in a new suit. 3. 3D, then 4H. Not quite strong enough to responsive double with no support for the highest unbid suit.

Looks like an easy double to me.

Its close but with the double fit I like 4S. After 4S 5C 5H 6D, 7C seems clear - I'd be surprised if it wasn't laydown. For me 6D must be showing extras - with JUST a diamond control partner can simply raise to 6H. Something like x Qxx Axx AQxxxx would be about what I'd expect.

Thanks for the replies. Sorry I didn't post the full auction - it was: (P) 1H (P) 1S (P) 2NT* (P) 3C* (P) 3S* (P) 4NT (P) 5C* (p) 6S AP Where North showed 5H, 4S, 18-19 HCP balanced or semi-balanced with 0/3 keycards. When the deal was played I continued by trying to ruff the 3rd diamond and got over-ruffed. Looking at the again now, my line was definitely inferior to the lines Fluffy, Dellache and Jlall suggest. Spades were 2/2 and the Kh was with doubleton with West so just about any other line would have worked.

MPs, vs the strongest opponents (in a weak field). After an unrevealing auction you reach 6S by South. North ♠AKT5 ♥QJ874 ♦KT ♣AT South ♠Q8762 ♥6 ♦A87 ♣KQ63 The lead is J♦ (underleading). Opponents signally is notionally reverse but they're known to be tricky. What's your plan? (Hint below)

If I had either of the hands you suggest as responder (all working values, nothing wasted in hearts and extra spade length) opposite my partner's value showing double I'd find something more than a 2S bid. For me 2S would be a normal negative double hand - usually with values in both majors - Typical would be a hand like QJxx AJxx xx xxx. I think maybe the difference in opinion comes from that fact that you don't think the double shows much extra, just 3S. Personally I'd pass with 11-14 and only 3S. That's just the way I prefer to play it though - I'm sure other methods are reasonable too.

Looks like an easy pass. Your double showed something extra, and I think that's all you've got. Partner could easily have just 6 or 7 points with short diamonds and only 4S.

You can solve this situation by using 2NT as a fit showing bid in all competitive auctions (after a major opening). With two strong raise options you can divide up your LIMIT raises and G/F raises. Personally I use the cuebid to shows exactly an limit raise, while 2NT is GF. Using this method solves all your forcing pass worries.

At IMPs I think the penalty double is indispensible (by an unpassed hand). Matchpoints is a completely different story and something like constructive Lionel seems a fine choice. I've been playing a weak-NT (and also very weak-NT) for a few years now and I've noticed a strong (stronger than normal) correlation between the quality of the opponents and the effectiveness of the opening. Weaker opponents often dig themselves into big holes with wide ranging over-calls and poor constructive judgment and rarely manage to effectively double us for penalties. Switching to a weak NT might be a good option if you are ever playing against weaker opponents and need to generate a big result.

In an expert partnership without discussion it would be natural(ish) and showing a maximum. For what its worth, in a serious partnership I'd prefer to just play a better version of checkback rather than making obscure NMF responses like this artificial...

3D, 3H and 3NT are all reasonable. I marginally favour 3D because that's where you live. If partner chooses to play in diamonds he won't be disappointed. The one bid I wouldn't make is 3S :) I can't see any reason that 3S shouldn't just be a showing a good 5c suit and offering choice of contract.

Nice posts by Phil and Jlall. One thing that I noticed watching the BB recently is that for a lot of top internationals (who over-call very lightly), their 1NT advance in this spot is very wide ranging (perhaps 7-13). Playing the cue-bid as showing full opening values is necessary to sort out such a wide range.

Agree with Jlall. Partner is denying the Ts so cashing another spade can't be wrong here.

A club lead is also fine on the layout - but I think as a general rule you're better leading from a K than from a Q.

Looks like an obvious pass to me. On a side note, 1D is pretty ugly :(

1H is obvious. Even opposite a passed partner we can still have the balance of the points.

1. 1NT 2. Pass 3. 3NT All pretty clear-cut IMO.

Epic post Ken. For most of us simpler folk, 4H would show a slam try without a significant second suit. How much it shows depends on how crazy your 3S bids are - mine vary significantly with the vulnerability. AKJxxx - Axx AKxx might bid 4H, but is strong enough to bid again afterwards. AKJxxx A Kxx Axx seems like a fine 4H bid. Note that on this hand you would love to be able to bid 3NT and ask for partner's shortage (and find out that its clubs). Kxxxx x AK AKxxx looks more like 4C for me - partner will know to upgrade values in Spades and Clubs (and downgrade holdings like 3 small clubs).

I like pass. As Phil suggests you can later double a club contract which gives a very good description of the hand, and if you end up defending 1NT that's fine too. At the table partner bid 2D and I went -1 in 2H (on a 3325). 1NT was going off, possibly 2 off.

Interesting to see such a balanced response set. On the board: Diamond lead sets up our partner's diamonds for +100. Spade lead doesn't give anything away for +50. Heart lead hits Qx in dummy for a quick -420. I led a heart but in hindsight, I prefer either a diamond (or even a spade). I think its the extra length that makes a heart so dangerous. Even if a heart lead DOES hit partner's honour, we might not be cashing any winners there. And if declarer/dummy have the AQh and a doubleton between them, then leading a heart blows our trick there. A diamond has more to gain (an increased chance to set up multiple tricks) and less to lose (even if declarer has all the diamonds we will often still score our K).