bd71

1. Red pen always 2. I seem to think best (such as it is) when hunched over, so I typically declare and defend with elbows on knees, cards held under the table, and face just a few inches from the table edge. Have received a few comments and more strange looks. I hope to some day play with screens, but fear that people will think I'm trying to sneak a peek at partner's face/reactions through the gap by leaning down like this.

Modified the "other" option in the poll to the omitted splinter response. Added new "other" at the end.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa863hak4d98532c8&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp]133|200[/hv] Standard 2/1. Pairs. What's your bid per the options in the poll?

Please assess the blame, or whether blame exists. [hv=pc=n&s=s6ha5dak9876cak62&n=sq73hkjt963d2cqj4&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=2sp3sdp4hp5dppp]266|200[/hv] Playing relatively standard 2/1. Pairs. 6♥ is a great contract. 5♦ is a nightmare when diamonds split 5-1.

Painfully basic no doubt...and yet we had a misunderstanding on it last night. Assume you are playing fairly standard 2/1. 1m (1S) X (2S) X How do you play the 2nd double?

4♠ I don't like double because: (1) there's a decent chance that partner passes and I can't believe defending is best here, (2) I think I prefer to play 4S to 5m even if partner only has 2 trump. My bid admittedly makes it much harder to get to slam, but I guess I'm surrendering to the "pre-empts work" philosophy here and taking what is close to a sure thing. If 4S is even too much because RHO was bidding to make and has a good spade holding, I have an escape route via 4N if RHO doubles.

Don't know that I have a great answer to your direct question, but two questions/comments: 1. See this recent thread where Jlall throws cold water on the idea of using the transfer-then-bid-4 sequence as "mild slam try." http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/60157-mild-medium-or-spicy/ 2. I've never used this good/bad suit approach for slam exploration in this context or any other. But seems like you have keycard/ace-asking approaches to find out about the top 3 trumps. Is your thinking that this approach adds value because it let's you avoid more 5-level contracts (following RKC sequences that discovered lack of key assets) that might not be safe, or because it solves the minor-suit issues where there may not be room for the full complement of RKC responses?

"pdi"?

2/1 context if it matters. 1D (2S) 3C (4S) X With your favorite partner and set of agreements how do you play this double? And what are the specific rules or meta-agreements you are using here? I realize this isn't too esoteric, but this sequence just tripped us up.

[hv=pc=n&s=sahaq42dat9852c74&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1n(good%2014-17)p2cp2dp3dp3np]133|200[/hv] Teams. 2nd board of 2nd half in 28-board knockout. Up 40 at the half. So far you have shown GF (not nec. slammish) hand with exactly 4 of a major and 5+ diamonds. Your options are: 4♦ - Slammish with long diamonds. Partner could then cue-bid or sign off in diamonds or at 4N (to play). 4♥ - Undiscussed, so risky...but there's a good chance (say 75%) partner would interpret this as 1st/2nd round control for exploring slam in diamonds, pinpointing clubs as weak spot. 4N - Quant invite. If partner accepts the invite, he will show aces (to be sure not off two) which will give you another chance to offer him 6♦ as an option rather than 6N. 5♦ - to play 5N - Choice of NT or ♦ slam.

Modified original poll to add option of Double. Two original "something else" votes that can't be changed appear to belong in Double.

[hv=pc=n&s=skht3dkj87543ckt3&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1s3h]133|200[/hv] Pairs. 2/1. Does your decision change with vulnerability or form of scoring?

[hv=pc=n&s=sajhaq5dk5caqt952&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=ppp]133|200[/hv] Pairs. 2/1.

Partner and I have a treatment (which I believe is common) where, over 4N RKC with a "useful void" we will bid 5N w/ even keycards and 6x (x=void) with odd keycards. We have adopted this more because we understand it's typically standard among good players rather than any deep understanding or experience with the treatment. Anyway, a few questions for those who feel more grounded in this method: 1. The presumption here seems to be that with a "useful void" and one keycard you're automatically in slam territory since you're virtually forcing to slam (unless you want to back out in 5N). Is that presumption always sound? Especially when the weaker hand is bidding 4N RKC, aren't there a number of situations when one keycard isn't enough? Or, is the expectation that people are deciding on a hand-by-hand basis whether the void plus keycards are sufficient, and even with a void if you feel you might be short of slam you just bid a standard 4-level keycard response, hiding the void? 2. Would appreciate folks comments on how good/useful they find this treatment...should it be automatic to include in our agreements? 3. Any other thoughts on pros/cons of this treatment?

For the majority saying they would open 1♣, is your intended rebid over the likely 1♠ going to be 2♣ or 2♥? If the latter, are you really comfortable showing reverse strength when you may not have a fit?

1♠ was NOT forcing. (Note: this line was edited 2-3 minutes after initially posted where I accidentally suggested the opposite.) 2♦ instead of 3♥ would be generic forcing bid, not necessarily showing ♠ support, and likely suggesting his strength is upper range for hand that didn't double-then-bid (so he likely maxes out around 16 points or playing-stength equivalent). It's this latter point -- the fact that his hand is capped by failure to double initially -- that caused me to simply bid 4♥. But the very good player sitting East suggested that he would have explored slam.

Not a fit-jump in our agreements...weak jump shift instead. Completely understand that fit-jumps in competition are superior, but we simply havne't gone there yet.

[hv=pc=n&s=sakj742h873dct864&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1d1hp1sp3hp]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Standard 2/1. No specific discussion or agreement on what the 3♥ jump shows. Do you agree with temporarily hiding heart support with the 1♠ bid? Are you interested in slam or satisfied with game? How would you pursue slam?

[hv=pc=n&s=s5ha9843d6caqt952]133|100[/hv] Matchpoints

Good point...updated the poll to show the cue-bidding option as 3D.

You are correct...will try to revise poll.

[hv=pc=n&e=sqj852hada742ckq4&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1sp3c(4+%20card%20limit%20raise)p]133|200[/hv] 2/1. Matchpoints? Your bid?

[hv=pc=n&e=s74hqt852dk83cqj4&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=1h3c]133|200[/hv] 2/1. Matchpoints. Your call?

[hv=pc=n&e=sqt83hkq94dk9864c&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=ppp]133|200[/hv] 2/1. Opps are two LOM (men). Your call?

[hv=pc=n&e=s4h54dkj52cakjt96&d=e&v=0&b=14&a=1c1h2d2h]133|200[/hv] 2/1. Matchpoints. Your bid?