pooltuna

this would be my preference as well

Really? Do most posters agree with this? No because it violates the KISS principle IMO

Double for me. Shouldn't this show an interest in whacking at least one of the majors when they bid it?

if you don't have a 4 card limit raise in your bidding structure it is probably best to just bid 4♠

IMO you need to be sneakier

did you forget to mention that the venue was the Bedlam Bridge Club? :D

you only have 12 cards. If partner's 3NT/2♣ shows 18-19 what does 2NT/2♣ show 12-14? :D

I would start with 2NT(presummably asks for partner's minor) and over 3♦ try 3♥

We appear to be assuming the OP meant an opening lead or a lead by a defender. It could just as well be a card played from dummy or from declarer's hand?

well you had advance warning in the auction that your partner was a turkey when he called 3♦ so you are essentially just guessing on this last hand(at least in my case) I would just bid 4♦

this gets my vote

I bid 4♥ and hope partner makes it

While I am a big proponent for protecting partner this is not the hand for it.

and you see a problem with the ♠K? Does that mean he is switching to a ♥? :)

likewise :)

just like the center of your answer and I prefer concentric circles myself :rolleyes:

4♥>A♦>5♣>>>>>>♠

assuming you play it, isn't this hand a definition for Gambling 3NT?

I assume it (hand 1) is a bidding problem for N and with a 12 card fit I am inclined to pass rather than XX so the opps don't escape :)

I think you are pretty much screwed into either X or 3NT

so if you had an uncontested auction with these hands that went you cho 1♦ 1♥ you only bid 3♥ with this hand?

I think you have to allow for misvotes so 95% is probably closer

Accept it as just bad luck. I know of no bidding system that is not essentially probablility based at some level. This is probably unavoidable in spite of the great efforts to reduce this aspect of the bidding.

1) Yes and yes 2) 4♣ is highly invitational 3) well 3♥, 3♠ should be forcing and I suspect initially inquiring about oM stoppers however 4♣ now implies either a shortage or a qbid. Note that 4M is either a 5x6y or x56y hand. Playing these as GF hand seems to make sense altho some will argue we should use 3M for those hands.

1) Yes and see no reasonable alternatives 2) -1 looks very probable. So if they find an X I am handing them 200 a very bad MP score. consequently I am inclined to pass.