pooltuna

That is kind of how I feel about X :)

It's not my system so I have to consider possible calls with in it. But I agree That I would bid 4♠ with the hand you provided . To me that seems to be a system limitation and given my hand and the bidding I expect partner to hold the 5♣ 4♠ 11-14 hand.

Well if this were IMPS I would guess 3♦ would be a good shot but at MP the danger of going for a big number is less critical and so I would bid 1♦

The apparent, to me, calls to consider are X, pass,4♠, and 5♣. Either bid looks very likely to go down as we probably have 3 losers in 5♣ and the expected bad break in spades probably makes it unmakeable. So we are left with pass or X. I suspect the opps have at least an 8 card ♦ fit which does not bode well for setting 4♥ alot but nevertheless I will X.

count me in with the 4♣ bidders

Any changes in a system need to be done in a system context so consequently consider the auction 1m-1M. We need to define all rebids with support. In particular simple raise 1♣-1♥-2♥ 1♦-1♥-2♥ 1♣-1♠-2♠ 1♦-1♠-2♠ double raise 1♣-1♥-3♥ 1♦-1♥-3♥ 1♣-1♠-3♠ 1♦-1♠-3♠ From here down all calls are at least game forcing. direct game raise 1♣-1♥-4♥ 1♦-1♥-4♥ 1♣-1♠-4♠ 1♦-1♠-4♠ splinters 1♣-1♥-3♠ 1♦-1♥-3♠ 1♣-1♠-3♥ see undefined 1♦-1♠-3♥ see undefined 1♣-1♥-3♦ see undefined 1♣-1♠-3♦ see undefined 1♦-1♥-4♣ 1♦-1♠-4♣ 6-4 hands 1♣-1♥-4♣ 1♦-1♥-4♦ 1♣-1♠-4♣ 1♦-1♠-4♦ undefined (exclusion or possible splinter?) 1♣-1♥-4♦ 1♣-1♠-4♦ 1♣-1♠-4♥ 1♦-1♠-4♥ There are 20 game forcing auctions grouped into 4 sections. Questions 1)How are you going to define the currently undefined group? 2)Why aren't the 6-4 hands being splintered? Is there a strength/control difference? I.e. How would you bid ♠y ♥AQ92 ♦AQ9753 ♣z vs ♠A32 ♥AQ92 ♦AQ975 ♣3 vs ♠A32 ♥AQ92 ♦AKQ97 ♣3? 3)Are all the direct game raise hands balanced or semi-balanced?

right on every point. Pard's hand not a l.r. for everyone (some will approve of it under pressure). Nobody likes overriding partner, but you had to, after having bid 4S --which certainly could have been done with a less powerful offensive hand. Pulling the double was good judgement on this round, and it is not always such. Hovever, put the club queen in partner's hand, instead of the spade jack and/or heart jack, same distribution, and it would be an "ATB" question. Most of the people polled would probably find the 4S bid to have been part of the problem. I agree with all except I strongly disagree with partner's double of 5D. This bid should show a strong preference for defending. I would expect partner's double to be more like Jxx, Qxx, KJxx, Axx Why can't it be just a warning which says I have the worst hand for my previous actions?

1)4♠ 2)I don't bid 2NT 3)take away the 2 Q and that is a maximum 2♠ bid; take away one the Q and that is a 3♠ bid; you are looking at a 4♠ bid

To call you "in the minority" would be an understatement. If I disagreed with virtually 100% of expert 2/1 players on the value of a bidding agreement, I would hope that I would be able to reconsider my position. he is not alone though. In a weak opening hand system (i.e. ANY eleven) Drury is unnecessary It is difficult to estimate the millions of matchpoints Barry Crane won by basically playing Drury in all seats - opening light and often and still being able to stop at the 2-level was a hallmark of the "Crane" system. oh so he had a built-in "psychic control" which no one else used because rightly or wrongly everyone else thought it was illegal in the ACBL

To call you "in the minority" would be an understatement. If I disagreed with virtually 100% of expert 2/1 players on the value of a bidding agreement, I would hope that I would be able to reconsider my position. he is not alone though. In a weak opening hand system (i.e. ANY eleven) Drury is unnecessary

After your 4♠ bid partner feels in a FP situation and doesn't want 5♦ to go by with you thinking a pull might be okay. Consequently partner probably has ♥ wastage and has a bad ♠ holding (at least from their hand's POV). Consequently I would take out insurance and pull to 5♠.

just duck the ♠ is probably your best shot. BTW not including an auction will not get necessarily the best answer. It is important to know the auction so that you can evaluate what the opponents know from the auction which impacts their leading tendencies.

2♣ seems pretty forced

yeah, its not like we're missing a game so why give them one if they make.

1) Well gut reaction is to try to ruff the 3rd ♥ and then draw trumps in 2 rounds with leading up to the ♣K as a back up 2) Feels close but I'd still try it based on gut reaction 3) 32% failure rate on 3-2 breaks means you need the 68% of time that it works to justify doing it. 2-2 split happens 41% and 50% for the ♣A to be onside. So 68%*(41% +59%*50%)=48% so no I just take the straight up ♣ finesse based on the numbers

Wouldn't you expect to defend 3H X if he has that? Not that that is necessarily a good thing, that's one reason I don't like double with a hand like this; I don't like the thought of partner passing. You would be defending 3♥X since I found an unhappy balancing double of 3♥. I would never double in direct seat with Axxx xx Axxx Axx.

What a horribly simplistic auction!!!! Of course it is the same one I would probably have. :)

But wait!! The doubler upgraded his hand because of all the Ts & 9s and holds[hv=s=sqjt9ht9dkjt9cajt]133|100|[/hv] and per BBF instructions stretches to act since he is short in the preemptor's suit :)

Well, actually, you missed the context. PEANUT GALLERY: Answering Aces won't work because you cannot bid 5♦ and have to play 6♦-1 KEN: Um, try 5NT JOSH: 5NT? What system knows that 11 tricks are available? KEN: Who cares? Well at the risk of exceeding Josh's attention span I will attempt to ask one question. Josh, your partner has just made a quantitative 4NT bid and you have the hand to accept what do you bid?

yes, though I think you have to push this hand much like you would with a Limit Raise hand having to bid game instead of the normal LR. For example 1♥ (2♠) where 3♥ is now a constructive raise.

club suit is 6 cards so you get 5 tricks with all 3-3 splits and 18 of the 30 4-2 splits. For the remaining 12 you need to plan the hand so you can take the ♠ finesse when you know you need it planning on giving up 2♥ and 2♣ in the process.

Clearly you need easy access to this location contract guarantor as you have problems with risk :lol:

probably pass

Ken, when partner invites you to game, and you accept, do you start cuebidding all your good cards to tell the opponents where everything is and allow them the opportunity to double or do you just bid game? How is this different? you are looking for a way to stay out of an unmakeable slam which is after all what Blackwood is really about.