wyman

Good point, I read the auction this morning and misremembered as I posted. Sorry. Carry on.

After RKC, are we sure that 6♦ is not asking for a 3rd rd ctrl in ♦? I mean we can look at east's hand and know, since wtf does west have then? [didn't ask about ♥Q, which we have. didn't ask about the ♣K, etc.] But can west know that east will know that 6♦ is not a 3rd rd ctrl ask? Also, I know it's MP, but with 4-card support in ♦ and a partner that didn't dbl, I'm surprised folks seem to be ok with 3♥ on A9xxx.

I tend to play Smith signals even after attitude. One needs to decide with partner whether attitude (and subsequently Smith) means "yes, please continue the suit from your side; it is safe" or "we have a future in this suit." Without Smith, you're stuck playing both roughly the same. With Smith, you can send a mixed message, as here, where you might want to say "we have a future in this suit, but I have a holding that is vulnerable." Here, if partner holds 10xxx, you probably don't want him leading spades again.

Then don't vote for it?

One thought it was reverse flannery, and one thought it was WJS, I assume. Of course, "reverse" flannery means 54xx, not 45xx...

You have to completely ignore the bidding here, since N/S both had a system mishap. But the play is nice, and the end position is cute. [hv=lin=pn|gwnn,teemuhy,BunnyGo,flameous|st ||md|4S456KHJD9JKC258KA%2CS3JH347KAD345TCTJ%2CS789AH568TQD678C4%2C|rh ||ah|Board%2010|sv|b|mb|p|mb|1C|mb|p|mb|2H!|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pc|C3|pc|CK|pc|CT|pc|C4|pc|HJ|pc|H3|pc|H5|pc|H2|pc|CA|pc|CJ|pc|D6|pc|C6|pc|C2|pc|S3|pc|H6|pc|C7|pc|S7|pc|S2|pc|SK|pc|SJ|pc|C5|pc|D3|pc|H8|pc|C9|pc|D8|pc|DA|pc|D9|pc|D4|pc|H9|pc|S4|pc|HA|pc|HT|pc|HK|pc|HQ|pc|D2|pc|C8|pc|H7|pc|S8|pc|DQ|pc|S5|pc|H4|pc|S9|pc|CQ|pc|S6|pc|D5|mc|8|] 400|300|[/hv]

estadounidense, while we're on the topic of spanish.

2N is the ostensibly weaker call, but direct 3D is NF, so I guess you can keep bidding after 2N-3Y...

I would bid 3D with this also; this hand is pretty good.

I don't play good-bad, so I'm trying to understand these auctions. Last weekend at teams: One table: [hv=d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1dp1s2h2n(good-bad)p4dp5dppp]133|100[/hv] The other: [hv=d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1dp1s2h2n(good-bad)p5dp6dppp]133|100[/hv] A few questions. At both tables, south decided she was too good for a direct 3D, so the plan was to bid 2N-3N. What is the difference between 3N and 2N-3Y-3N? At both tables, north decided he was too good to bid a passable 3D over 2N. But in this auction, can't you bid like 3C and then bid again over 3D? What's the difference between a jump over 2N, and a 3C-3D-4D/5D?

Clubs. Opener has only shown 5 spades. This is what I play with all current partners, and I'd expect other treatments are abnormal and require discussion.

Well, it wasn't totally obvious that (a) with the garbage we respond on, a 1426 bust wouldn't want a way to play (< 5) clubs [obviously 3C-3D-3N is a mild slam try with clubs], and (b) 4D after 2N is not an autosplinter. If (b) is a splinter, then responder needs (?) a way to show diamonds, so it wasn't totally clear that 4D/3S was a spade cue. [it is clear though that 4H should be, imo] And if you play 4C/2N is clubs and not G or autosplinter, then you can probably afford to give up 3C-3D-4C as "come on baby." (or you can use direct 4C to play, maybe that makes more sense)

1C - 1H 2N - 3D <art gf> 3S - 4C Clubs or a spade cue? Best treatment for each of the following? 1C - 1H 2N - 4C 1C - 1H 2N - 3C! <forces 3D> 3D - 4C

April 22, Team 4 v Team 3, 1pm eastern (daylight).

You have to be willing to bid 3♦ with this, else you need to agree to open a wide 2♣. This is not a 2♣ opener for me, but I understand that this is a style choice. Another style question is, as gwnn points out, what 1H-4H means. But I definitely think it's far more prevalent to see this showing a hand slightly too good to preempt 4H than a hand showing the world's fair. And I think that this is more consistent with prevailing principles about bidding cheaply with good hands (e.g., fast arrival).

We play 3S as dbl fit and 3N as saying "no, hearts." 4x is a Spade cue if 3n not bid. Not ideal but it's at least _an_ agreement.

I swear I'm not responding because it's you (in fact, I considered _not_ responding because it's you). However, to your points: I don't see (2) as a reason not to preempt. If anything, opps are more likely to bid a game (possibly the wrong one, if there's a right one) if we preempt, and if partner has defensive tricks, great. Also, re: your comment in (1), they are getting a bad break in both majors, which is great for us. Re: (3), your intermediates are not that bad, and at these colors, if they have enough to penalize 3D after a takeout, they are at least considering 3N. Plus, you know there are spades somewhere around the table. I think it's really unlikely that we play 3Dx. (4) is a legit concern but again is somewhat balanced out by (2). (5) I dont think anything is ever demanded. Also it's not at all clear that partner will be on lead. And (6), you follow up by saying you'd consider 4D with x / Jxxx / QJxxxx / xx, which I find totally inconsistent. I don't know why partner is thinking about your losers specifically in the diamond suit. He's thinking about your losers in general. If he bumps you to 5/6 diamonds, it's incredibly unlikely that you'll have more than one loser in diamonds anyway. Your 6-4 has similar playing strength to a 7222, and I think it's certainly worth a bump to 3D. As I told OP privately, other calls that crossed my mind were 1D, 1H, and 2D. Ranking them, I think 3D > 1D > 1H > 2D, though I think the last two are close (as both are pretty bad, at least 1H serves as a lead director though).

Basically yes. Bidding a new suit at the 2-level should show 5+ cards, not 4+ (this was true after an opening 1-bid as well, I think, but you should defer to the LTPB software).

My guess: Traditionally, one does not open 1N with two doubletons. So, with two 5-card majors, you can bid 3S-then-4H with impunity, knowing that partner has at least one 3-card major. Moreover, as has been mentioned, this treatment is consistent with other standard methods, whereby you bid the higher-ranking suit first so that partner can correct without jumping. Also, it is kind of unnatural to force opener to bid 3S on a 3-card suit. Your idea does make sense; it's just not standard. Hope this helps.

No problem. I had a feeling we were on different wavelengths, but I wasn't sure.

What I'm proposing, to be clear: 3S = nonserious, says nothing about spades ...3N = spade cue ...4C = club cue, denies spade cue ...4D = diamond cue, denies S&C cues 3N = serious spade cue 4C = serious club cue, denies spade cue 4D = serious diamond cue, denies S & C cue

I agree with everything you said until you told me what i HAVE to do. Why can't I prioritize seriousness here instead of _my_ spade control? Partner can still cue _her_ spade control after I bid a non-serious 3S (saying nothing about spades). I don't see why your way is clearly better (and in fact, I think it's kind of clear that swapping 3S and 3N is better). Am I being really dense here? I feel like I'm missing something... edit: Ha, I think I see what you are saying. I can cue 3S without a spade control as well, if that's my agreement, but what's UN-playable is bypassing 3S with a spade control and a nonserious or better hand. Totally agree with that (if that's what you were saying).

I would not double opposite a weak NT, but I would auto dbl opposite a strong NT.

... And to make amends for my earlier comment, the following is an easy to follow description (for beginners) of which bids are and are not forcing partner to bid again! http://www.math.cornell.edu/~belk/forcing.htm

Without turning this into (yet another) "what's appropriate for N/B" thread, I'll say that I think it's good that people are calling others out on poor posts (for the audience). To keep the threads (moderately?) clutter-free, I'll suggest doing this via PM and making liberal use of the "edit" feature if you receive feedback that perhaps your post is not aimed at the right audience.