Walddk

Take-out double is the answer. Maximum for his 1♦ which, playing Precision, must be 15 or very good 14 with 1354, 1345. He could even have 1444. We must have a slam on, maybe a grand slam even. With a penalty of 4♠ partner must pass and wait for me to reopen with a double. That's how I play it; I am sure others have different agreements. I will now make up for my lazy 4♥ call and bid 6♥. A question beside the point: Why the rush? What do you bid with ♠ x ♥ AQJ10xxxx ♦ xx ♣ xx If you don't have a strong jump shift available over 1♦, then 1♥ is much better than 4♥ on the hand you actually had. The hand I display is a 4♥ response to me. Roland

Why open 1NT on a hand you can describe easily? Especially if you play 1♣ - 1red ; 1♠ as unbalanced. Off shape NT's should only be used in situations where you can't show your hand conveniently. With the hand you give us here I don't see a problem with opening 1♣. Roland

I don't see 5332 as off shape. To me and most others I believe this is one of the three patterns for a balanced hand, 4333 and 4432 being the other two. Any 5422 (not 54 in the majors) and 6322 with a 6-card minor are off shape notrump openings. I think you should avoid them if you have any excuse whatsoever. I do concede, however, that certain 5422 hands are best opened 1NT. 2245 with 16 for example, but only with honours in both doubletons. There is no need to open 1NT on a 2254 hand. 1♦ followed by 2♣ looks normal and better to me. The problem is the 15-16 counts with longer clubs than diamonds, not strong enough to reverse. Example: ♠ Q4 ♥ A5 ♦ KJ94 ♣ AQxxx This is not a reverse after 1♣ - 1MA. Now 1NT is perhaps the least of evils. ♠ K5 ♥ AQ74 ♦ K10974 ♣ QJ And this is not a reverse after 1♦ - 1♠. But with this hand it would not be a major crime to rebid diamonds. As a general rule I think you should only open 1NT when you are in your range with 4333, 4432 and 5332. But then again, no rule without exceptions. Finally, we could retreat to the eternal discussion about whether you should have a 5-card major or not. Let's leave that subject for another occasion. Roland

You were West and went down in 5♠X on a trump lead. There are several ways to make 5♠ and one to score an overtrick. That is the reason for your poor result. Five scored 850, three 1050 for +3.42 and +7.31, and then there were other big EW scores for doubled spade contracts making with or without overtrick(s). You won dummy's ♠A, led the queen and overtook with the king. This was the point of no return. After ♠Q winning, you can play on diamonds for 11 tricks. After trick 1 you can play on clubs and make 12 tricks, provided that you saved the precious ♠2. ♠A (7 from hand) ♣A Club ruff (higher than the deuce) High spade to the queen Club ruff (higher than the deuce) ♠2 to dummy's 4 12 tricks (7 spades, 1 diamond and 4 clubs). Saving ♠2 is standard technique for experts. Don't despair if you don't find that play at the table. The lesson to learn is that you can't come to 11 tricks if you overtake the queen of spades (unless someone has the doubleton ♦KQ). There is absolutely no hope when you cash a 3rd trump. If you decide to play on diamonds you must do it from dummy at trick 2 or 3. Roland

Not that far away on the auction that may have been on the actual hand (double fit known assuming 2/1): 1♠ - 2♥ 3♥ - 3♠ etc. Congratulations to you if you really have that hand, Fluffy. I am on my way down <_< Roland

I bid 2♣ followed by 2♥ over 2♦. If I play with you where 22 in the majors may be the rule rather than the exception I will just pick one of the majors and transfer. I can't remember when I or my partners last opened 1NT with 2254 or 2245. 2♥ is not invitational. In an earlier post I described how I invite with 5-4 or 4-5. Roland

That is not true though. In the unlikely event that partner opened 1NT on 2254 or 2245, he will correct to 2NT over 2♥. So a 7 card fit is guaranteed if opener passes or bids 2♠. As you point out yourself, it is not if you pass 2♦. Roland

On the actual hand with 4 diamonds I agree, Justin. I should have said 4432, 4423 or 4414. Then I think it's nice that 2♥ shows 44 in the majors. Roland

Unless you play that 2♥ shows 4-4 in the majors (pass or correct). This is Garozzo's original treatment which I play with some partners. So what do I do with an invitational 4-5 or 5-4 hand? With 4-5 I transfer to hearts and bid 2♠ (invitational). With 5-4 I bid Stayman followed by 2♠ (invitational again). If your methods allow you to bid 2♥ (4-4), 2♣ is surely with the odds on the actual hand. 2♠ would then be the final contract. Roland

I understand what you are saying Wayne, but it's not a good idea to bid a shorter suit before a longer. The way you bid you will never make partner believe that you have more clubs than diamonds. The thing to realise now is that you must sign off in the best possible partscore. I am sure you agree, by looking at your own hand only, that you want to play in exactly 3♣. So bid it and tell partner afterwards why he should not have bid on. Roland

The bidding: Noth could have overcalled 1NT, and NS would have ended up in 2♠. When North decided not to come in, I think the bidding was ok (2NT perhaps a slight overbid) until East's 3♦. East wants to sign off in 3 of minor with that hand, but why he would choose his lousy diamonds (5-card suit) rather than his good-ish 6-card club suit I don't understand. Over 3♣ West should pass, as he should have over 3♦. 3mi is weak and a sign off. If East had been interested in game he would simply have raised to 3NT. The play: The contract has no play on any lead. Even ♠A will not help declarer. He has too many diamonds to get rid of. Roland

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sk2hq732d7532caj6&w=saj8754h8dj84ck102&e=s103hj109654d6cq985&s=sq96hakdakq109c743]399|300|Scoring: IMP S: 5D Lead: C2 to your 8 and declarer's 3[/hv] Very good analysis Winston! The queen of hearts will be left stranded if you take dummy's entry away. Declarer's diamonds are too good! How can I know that partner does not have 4 clubs and that he is not void in hearts? You can't be sure of course, but there are a few things that tell you that the two unknown hands are as they were in real life. 1. Would partner have led the deuce of clubs if he was void in hearts? Would he not have led a higher club, alternatively underled his ace of spades in the hope of getting a heart ruff? 2. Would declarer have played low from dummy if he had a doubleton club? Probably not, because he wouldn't have given the defence a chance to get a heart ruff then. This points towards the killing defence (if there is one). East got it wrong at the table and tried to give partner a heart ruff. Inserting the 8 at trick 1 was both good and courageous, but he fell from grace 1 minute later. It's so much easier in the post-mortem, is it not?. Roland

PASS. I have had enough. I already showed a good hand by overcalling at red, and the quality of the club suit is nothing to write home about. The ♠Q is not the greatest value either. Finally, I can't be sure that we have a fit. Partner can easily have some length in spades. The worst but possible scenario is 3-4-5-1. I am happy to defend. Roland

4th from Hxxx, low from Hxx

"South overcalled a natural 3NT"

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=sk2hq732d7532caj6&e=s103hj109654d6cq985]266|200|Scoring: IMP S: 5D Lead: C2 to your 8 and declarer's 3[/hv] This hand came up in the Danish Team Championships. At one table West opened a weak 2♠, North passed and you pre-empted further with 3♠. South overcalled a natural 3NT and was raised to 4NT. South then took out in 5♦ (explained as natural). After a long huddle your partner leads ♣2, and you overcome the first hurdle by inserting the 8 which holds the trick. What do you do at trick 2 and why? Roland

How did South of all people become declarer in 4♥? I will be happy to suggest a line of play if 4♥ is the contract, but I will wait for your confirmation. Roland

You do as you please. If they work for you, fine. No one has a monopoly of the truth. Roland

You could open a chat room and advertise in the lobby. Then you will get those who are interested to join that chat room. I don't think there is a need to create a special "who wants to play a team game room". Roland

I have tried it 2 or 3 times over the years, but it actually happened recently on BBO vugraph in the exhibition match between Netherlands and Republic of Ireland. 3♣ just made for EW at one table. 3♣X by NS at the other table. No success. It went for 1700! Roland

That is definitely not how I see it. An intermediate player should not be exposed to squeezes, endplays etc. He/she has plenty to do with learning the basics still. The difference between experts and all other categories is quite simple: Experts make less mistakes than the rest. Or as Bob Hamman once put it: "Experts play badly, the rest even worse". Roland

I disagree. My 4♦ denied a club control, so if he doesn't have one, it is his problem, and I will look forward to seeing my dentist. Roland

He can't have been drinking diet coke all day. A hand that could not come in over 1♠ can now cue the opening suit twice. Oh well, let me trust him then. He has something like Axxx Qxxxx x AQx The club finesse is likely to be on, so I bid 6♥. If he has less than that, I will finish the hand and make this comment: "Sorry all, I have an urgent appointment at my dentist's. Will me more fun than this" :P Roland

[hv=d=s&v=b&n=sk76ha7432dqjck98&s=sa109854hkq5dakcaq]133|200|Scoring: IMP S: 6S Lead: ?[/hv] You have bid to a very good 6♠, the second best slam (6NT is slightly better), but at least you avoided the third best: 6♥. How should you play trumps if the lead is 1. ♦10 2. ♥6 Does it matter at all? Roland

I also respect the players Fred mentions, but I am a subscriber to the principle of using a specific opening at the 2-level for what is more frequent. I think all will agree with me that a weak 2 in diamonds for example comes up much more often than the requirements for a Flannery hand. As far as I recall, Fred uses 2♦ for exactly that purpose in his partnerships with both Brad Moss and Sheri Winestock (Fred's wife). The same applies to 3NT as gambling (solid minor with nothing or little outside). When did any of you have a hand for that? You are more likely to have had a hand where you would have wanted a natural 4♣ or 4♦ if it hadn't been for your agreement on how to show a strong pre-empt in hearts and spades (Namyats). You don't have to give up on either if you use 3NT as a pre-empt in either minor. What about the solid suit then? Well, forget about it, and if you refuse, at least realise that 3NT is not the bid for that hand. Because if NT is the spot, it is much more often than not wrong-sided. Roland