pooltuna

is this an agreement or are you trying to penalize the previous poster :blink:

generally a good question but given our spots I can see it is easy going for a ruff in this situation

The critical factor is that opps slam chances are near 0 so I am risking -500,-800,-1100, or -1400 vs their + 460 or +450. While the risk may be relatively low it still exists and the gain from lead direction is less clear. So a case can be made for passing. Of course at reversed colors I have been known to call 2♦ altho not usually in 2nd seat :)

1)agree 2)agree It is the nature of bridge that sometimes good bids are punished and bad bids rewarded.

something weird might work....make a negative double and then bid ♦/♥. You do have ♠ protection if worst comes to worst :)

or hold a lot of ♣s :)

The rushers are often the same group that plays all 13 cards one at a time when they could have claimed at trick 2 (or at least some time earlier). My advise tell them "If you are so worried about time you need to CECO!"

not so bad at least we have a license to steal so I would try 3♦ and let the opps try to figure out what to do when they are V.

1)Not with this particular hand 2)Use Jordan(2NT over the X) to show LR+ hands. I would have opened the hand you are showing so could use Jordan if the 2♦ replaced the Q 3) yes 2♠ is a normal crappy raise while 3♠ is a preemptive raise showing a 9 card fit(attention to vulnerability applies though) and 4♠ is normally a 10 card fit preempt. 4) start with Jordan where new suits below game are forcing.

somehow it seems wrong to use forcing (or semi-forcing in your case :) ) 1NT with a GF hand. There should normally be other choices.

I have modified my view and think 3♥ is near auto if you play constructive raises. If you don't play constructive raises you probably should just bid game as 3♥might not be encouraging enough

East showed a constructive raise when in fact he had a limit raise (and consequently should just bid game). And I don't care if it is not comfortable. :)

:)

just 2♥ as partner couldn't scrape together a 2♥ call and did not preempt in ♠ we rate to be looking at a dummy that will look like 5233 and the few values he has will likely be wasted in ♠

The T♦ will work as long as partner has either A♦ or A♠. The alternative ♣ requires partner to have an entry and the ♣Q

you haven't kept up with hanp!!! 2=xx and 5=xxxxx

well 6♣ should be playable as your pard bid the suit where you have a worthless doubleton and an 8 card suit is nothing to sneeze at.

why not don't I have the offensive version of my previous constructive raise. It appears to me the other option was I could pass 3♦X

Is this one that is going to be held on Isle Royale National Park? :rolleyes:

while I agree with your 3♠ call not sure you want to drive to slam as pard may have wasted ♠ values

lead the Q♥

Based on point count I would prefer to play 3NT but partner could hold 4342 with the 2 being xx. So I resign myself to 3♣ so partner can support ♥ with 3 or go to 3NT

if you are playing equilevel conversions then X is best. Failing that I would try 2♦ rather than belly-up (=pass)

ARCH A=analyze the opening lead you did this R=review the bidding note that neither opponent was inclined to enter the auction. This is relevant to card placement. C=count your winners and your losers looks like 1♥, 3-5♣, 0.5♦,3-4♠ are your winners 2♠, 1♦, 1♥ are your losers. H=how can I make this hand you need 4 more tricks and if you can hold ♠ losers to 2 you will make your contract but you need to lead ♠ twice from dummy for the %age play and it would be better if you didn't have to try and cash your 3rd ♣ winner while a low trump was still out. Consequently lead a low ♠ inserting the T if it could win the trick (i.e. cover East's card). Expected defenses with West winning trick 2, ♥ and a ♥, ♥ won by East with a ♦ shift. If the first ruff the 3rd ♥ get to dummy and lead another ♠ to the 9. If the latter cover East's ♦card unless dummy's 9 will do that. Ruff the ♥ continuation and get to dummy to lead a ♠ This is only partially complete. Much more effort for a more complete answer would be required and I ain't Rexford :rolleyes:

Not just the vulnerability but the actual colors play into the decision as well as how many tricks you expect to take if you defend and your estimated chances of making if you bid on. It looks like we will set 4♠ 2 tricks (1♥+2♦+2♣). Likewise the chances of making 5♥ IMO is not much better than 50% as we rate to possibly lose a♠, a♦ and a ♣. It looks like we need to make our game 70% of the time to bid on. As a caveat I expect partner's 3♥ bid to be a constructive raise and think he would have bid 4♥ with a limit raise. So X at all colors