pooltuna

assuming pass of XX="this is the contract partner" then 1NT is a near game force otherwise it is a DSIP call

Hearts are not going to break, there was a vulnerable 5♣ overcall! and knowing how to play the hand is worth 0%? :P

I think it is. While it seems unusual to have to alert the natural meaning of pass. It is an agreement and would not normally be expected by the opponents and consequently needs to be alerted. As a caveat I am not a TD and just giving an opinion based on my gut feeling about the rules. I prefer to play the pass in this way to deter XX psyches.

hmmm what is partner supposed to do with the following hand since he just wants to play game not issue a slam invitation [hv=s=sxxhqjxxdkxxcaqjx]133|100|[/hv]

Give North ♠QJT9 ♥KJ(x) ♦xxx ♣Kxx South's lead may not be "honest" if you play for 10 tricks, you could end up with 8, losing 2 spades, 2 hearts and 1 club Tony Clearly you don't jeopardize the contract by taking a finesse if it means risking 9 tricks but you still set up the ♣♥ squeeze by ducking a ♠. You win the next ♠ lead and take the ♥ finesse because you expect it to win and leave you with a chance to try the ♣ finesse if both win you are now set to execute the squeeze.

assuming mostly 2/1 or sayc partnerships I would expect an auction that looks like p (p) 2NT (p) 3NT all pass

I hate to disagree, but imps is imps ♥10 or ♥Queen @ trick 1 guarantees the contract, later establishing a second club trick Your only concern at imps is to secure the contract. Overtricks have little value Now, if this was matchpoints...... Tony :) Edit: Even ♥Ace works, oppo can only take ♥KJ Generally speaking you are correct when you say the contract comes first. However in this instance you are wrong as it is virtually certain to make so you need to make every effort to make whatever overtricks you can secure. Perhaps you can suggest a defense that is setting this 3NT contract where the line for OTs makes a difference?

So let me see if I understand this correctly you would rather play in 7♥ than 7NT if the hands look like this[hv=n=sxhaqxxxdxxxckxxx&s=sakq1087hkxxdakqca]133|200|[/hv] That would be absurd since 7NT would make when you have a ♥ loser but the ♠ suit comes in.

easy for game but this is an overtrick problem even if it is IMPS. So I agree with those who play the T♥ losing to the J and duck the ♠ return.

basically he is telling you that IHO your system suc...er vacuums. Altho I agree with 1NT. The followups are unclear because we don't really know what options your partner passed up as you didn't give system information. The reason many refuse to play TOX with 15-17NT is that it puts pressure on the partner who knows the least about the hand. So tell me which partner knows whether or not game makes sense? Whether penalizing the opponents makes sense? Which partner knows whether it is time to bail out? The 1NT opener is the one who now has to guess all these things. As a consequence responder's failure to act has to be read as "time to bail out, partner" and you have IMO surrendered the penalty X option.

Oh goodie you are playing IMPS Red vs White :)

X, DSIP

Yep let's really put the strap to partner in case he holds[hv=s=sjxhxxxxxdjxxcjxx]133|100|[/hv] :) 4C for me as sometimes pard holds a better hand. ♠ Ax ♥ xxxxx ♦ K ♣ Kxxxx Lebensohl is a good convention after doubles of weak 2's and lessens the guesswork as to what pard holds. yeah if I thought partner could hold that I would venture 4♣ trouble is I would be hit with an insufficient bid director call as partner had already bid that.

at MP you can only get a 0 so I would bid 3♥ at IMPS 2♥ would be tolerable altho I would like to hold the T&9♥ Edit at IMPS second choice would be Pass and not 3♥

Yep let's really put the strap to partner in case he holds[hv=s=sjxhxxxxxdjxxcjxx]133|100|[/hv] :)

It is clear a takeout double just like every other low level double in BBO forums. After all aren't all penalty doubles verbotten below the 4 level :)

Does GF mean we can't play partner to hold Q♠ & J♣ or are we too worried about partner going overboard?

either partner has a weak ♥ stack and does not feel comfortable passing 2♥X or he has enough to bid 3♥ but doesn't know how to handle this type of hand. Assume the former and pass.

essentially 2♠ is still preemptive and consequently 3♠ is not a preemptive Michaels but is meant as forcing bid which shows a hand too big to chance a TOX. Consequently just bid 4♥.

IMO they didn't make their point in this particular situation. Now I am not saying that TOX will never work in this situation just that taking away a penalty X is too big a price.

An agressive FP agreement is to play FP in seq., where one side opened and the other made a inv.+ response. To play this rule is certainly not mainstream. This rule would not apply in the current situation, because 2D was only a one round force. Nevertheless it is certainly playable, that a 1 round forcing 2/1 response does setup a FP for the 4 level or higher (maybe above 4 of openers suit). With kind regards Marlowe I suspect it is probably good to kill FP on the LR calls as the variability of strength for these due to fit is too great to risk one.

This is simple but too much chance it is an underbid Maybe, maybe not. As it is after a club lead, even 6NT would need spades 3-3, and p has a nearly normal 2H response. He has only 4 hearts, so ..., In the end 6S is a contract, which will ensure that you go plus, and under the given circumstances, that is what I try to achieve going plus, taking the money I can take without too much risk. Of course, if ou want to investigate 7, than your best chance is to bid 3H instead of ???, which p wont pass. And after that, you can bid 4NT as RKCB for hearts, and if you like, you can bid 5NT asking for kings. With kind regards Marlowe

4♠ and over 5♦ I bid 5♥

This is simple but too much chance it is an underbid

Are you surprised that nobody has responded yet? :lol: