pooltuna

well partner seems to be asking for 1st or 2nd round control of ♥ or more likely ♣ or he is asking for ♠ help ...fortunately you have none so I pass

it's late enough here that I might regret these in the morning nevertheless 1) 4♣ 2) pass

...2♥ 3♦ 4♦ ?

If all bids are weak over the TOX then XX and cue bid the next round

Why? They are unlimited in their values, all they did was bid keycard then find out they were off the DA and stop in 6. We don't even have a jack in another suit. Looks pretty bleak to me. Amen!!! if this a weak or inexperienced pair you can bet they are not alone in slam. Collect that ace while you can. As an aside if there is a trump finesse you have given declarer a reason to finesse you for it.

Which bridge do you collect tolls for? Oh wait!!! those are Trolls :)

If you are going to game why don't you try for slam and self-splinter

I choose to struggle in 3NT

EDIT oops looked at the auction wrong based on the strength of my spot cards I pass :)

pass and hope partner makes it :lol:

probably works okay for MP but since I have distinct preference for IMPS I also play RONF

yeah works great altho the police sirens are loud when I scream out "y.. f...... id..." but it does make for great relief of anguish :rolleyes:

Do I require 4♥ for X in your system?

I don't bid, but I do call pass. Partner is still there and I will raise 2♠ to 3

you are the one playing Bergen so why don't you tell us (of course telling your partner would be best) if 4♣ is natural. I would think 3♥ (and 4♣) would be qbids in this auction. That gives you a chance to see if partner is going to bypass a 4♣ qbid. If he does you can practically jump to 6♠

And you will get to listen to partner explain how he thought that this was the only way to bid a 5-6 :) Well part of the reason I brought this up was to see what the general opinion of follow-ups was. I was defending against this hand and in the post-moretem the opps seemed to think that the next bid was shortness. BTW how is 13-15 a stupid range for this bid (not directed at you, Phil)? You'd rather it just be 13 and that's it? Do you bid 3NT with 11-12? Isn't it generally standard to play this way? How do you play 1m-3N? Some sort of convention? I play it as 3334 with 15-17(a strong NT) and 2NT/1m as forcing generally how you are using 3NT

JOSH?! We are in the process of renaming you both JLall becomes Jostin and JDonn becomes Jush :)

Well since you play this IMO stupid range then you have Gerber in your conventions basket and now is the time to use it otherwise just bid 6♣ and let partner choose. no doubt partner had[hv=s=saxxhakxdxxxcaxxx]133|100|[/hv] and you made a reasonable choice of passing.

Hard for me to imagine partner leading from either the K or Q♠ so I will insert the 9 to reduce declarers auto tricks. I have to plan my discards on ♥ before I try this so I will come down to AT♠ Q9♦ T♣

X seems the uncomfortable and only choice planning on a NT rebid over ♥s probably will raise 1♠ to 3

He is still good as you have just been presented with an ugly guess and good players excel at that. Is partner capable of doubling with 2 A in the unbid suit? If not I would risk 4♠ as there are many hands that make with a fit and any 2 of AK♠, A♥,A♣ certainly even [hv=s=sxxxxxhxxdxxxcaqx]133|100|[/hv] has odds on play

you are v so i risk 3♥ (nv i would justin..er chicken out on 3♥) after all what is partner going to do with dealer: ????? vul: ???? scoring: unknown]133|100| ♠ Kxxx ♥ Kx ♦ xxx ♣ AQxx [/hv]over 2♥

Because 1) 2♣ is a NFB and 2) 2♠ is a LR+ for ♦ which are great for part scores but tough on game bidding and last time I checked if you bid game you get 300 or 500 xtra points instead of 50. And why I don't use NFB and save 3♦ for a LR and 2♠ as a GF neither promising or denying ♦.

The number of variables introduces enought ambiguity that it makes it hard to bid 7♠ so I will settle for 6♠. Hoping partner looking at A♣,A♠, K♥ will bid 7 which probably makes easily on a ♥/♣ squeeze except that the A♦ lead taps us so we end up losing control :(

I am passing both. The second one because it just feels too much like a preempt/preempt