pooltuna

Why do ♠ and ♣ singletons have a 37.5% probability while ♦ have only a 25% probability? :)

hopefully South's 2♣ call denied a 4 card major. Nevertheless North needs a ♦ splinter call which is short of 3NT (BTW I really, really hate the 3NT bid with a stiff ♦ but it would at least be tolerable if it was an A or K)

Your choices should be pass or double not 5♦!

Pearson points are a surprisingly effective guide :)

yeah I bite the bullet for 5♦ even tho I have no clue if I am attempting to make or bidding a sac.

If partner will always raise 2♠ with what would normally be a constructive raise in an uncontested auction then I will try 2♠ otherwise I will call 2NT.

since someone is suggesting based on the given assumptions that the drop and the finesse are equal. I would add the caveat "until now" after "always plays his lowest spot card" and finesse

2♥ is fine I pass 3♣

Adam Wildavsky-Michael Polowon is more like two pros than a pro and a client.

1. A♥ 2. A♦ 3. Q♣ 4. K♥ 5. finesse J♣

Okay let's see what would be a really stupid meaning for this X....aha it must be a support double :) BTW I really agree with penalty not sure I see any other way to tell the 1NT opener he made an error bidding his 5 card suit

[snip] On hand 2 I would just open 2S, we are r/w, call me wimpy if you want. Why are you going to pay me back next Tuesday for the hamburger I buy you today? :)

Wait!! these are the Russian or Chinese players, also know as pinkos :) As a more honest possibility others could mean vulnerable conditions apply to a particular player but the connection issue is also a strong or stronger candidate.

1. 3♠ 2. presummably I have to use 2♦? otherwise 2♠ 3. 4♣

preempts work! I really hate bidding to a level where I have to finesse the preemptor for an offsuit(not his suit) card for the contract to make.

band wagon

the "convention with no name" normally shows a 46 hand not much above minimum opener. My fear is the 7th ♣ may make the hand too strong and 6♠ an even better candidate to make.

Use the bridge version of Occam's razor; "the defense that requires the least number of complications will work most often" :)

Strangely tempted to try a neg X followed by 4♠ to show this hand. Otherwise I will bid 3♣ and follow it with 4♠

well my gut instinct was to snatch the ♥A while the snatching was good, draw the remaining trump and hope ♠ were 32. Winning 6♠+ 5♦ + 1♥ but there are several curious things going on after winning the ♦A I would have slapped down the ♣A so fast the echos from the slap would be reaching you after circling the earth. Ergo he ain't got it. This makes the ♥ finesse near certain and I can see several lines where I will need a second entry to set up the ♠ suit or at least access it. So I probably would grit my teeth and take the finesse, accepting any ridicule for it failure to win.

with 6 tricks left you hold in hand KJxx and in dummy AQT9xx no opposing trumps out don't your really think you should claim rather than play. That is what I am talking about

:lol: I would find "I thought 4♥ was a transfer" move believeable. :)

I agree with this as I am not wild about 4♦, 4♥, or 4♣ calls.

Not having full information I will assume there are no indications that suggest 3-2♦ are very unlikely then clearly the superior line is to set up the 4&5♦ using the T♥ as an entry

IMO .... South