Jinksy

What about 3N rather than X?

It's close, but I'll pass. It feels too offensive for us to be beating 2♠ if they bid it, and too defensive to expect 3 of anything to be odds on.

'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'.

I live in England and regularly play club bridge in which people often describe their system as 'Acol'. Not once have I seen any of them using a direct cue as a game-forcing hand. You can claim it's not strictly Acol if you like, but then your claim that it's 'the dominant system in the United Kingdom' is ludicrous.

It still seems unclear to me. Partner is allowed to blast, especially opposite a limited hand (eg no-one would have batted an eyelid at 1N P 6S), and it hardly seems clear that, by checking for a 4cM, he's relinquishing that right.

So is the jump to 4♦ basically a forcing 'I only didn't open 2♣ because I had an extreme two-suiter that I'd never get to bid' bid?

Especially bad form to call someone smug just a couple of posts after boasting of your Master Point total. I assume you've contacted Phil per his request, to name a convenient time to take all his money?

Neither. P had a strong hand, and if (s)he took an optimistic view of a second seat 4♠ bid, you'd end up in a poor slam that happened to make. A moral story for us all...

Well if a second suit would be forcing and the hand is distributional enough to care about a 4-4 spade fit when it has the values for 6N, it feels like you could do that anyway with the hand with 4 spades. But even if not, I'm envisaging a hand (you might not agree it's this one) that has no particular interest in playing with the second suit as trumps, either because the second suit is too weak or spades too good.

Well actually he doesn't. IIRC he messaged you, requesting a time for the game and you never responded. Unless you expect him to show up at your house with two robot companions, I'd say the onus is on you. No, of course not.

X

Interesting that this has the most support - it's what the guy apparently meant (I wasn't part of the partnership). It doesn't seem very intuitive to me, though. I would just have taken it as a hand that wanted to play in 6♠ after hearing a 2♥ response to Stayman - probably a crisp but insubstantial 2-suiter that hoped to do a lot of cross-ruffing AQJxxx Kx Axxxx - or something.

I believe Timo already offered you the same challenge, and after a lot of bluster you failed to pick up the gauntlet. I'm sure he'd still be willing to make the offer if you've changed your mind, though.

I'm expecting the auction to continue for precisely three calls after mine.

Sure, it seems daft to me, but I just wanted to check I wasn't missing some kind of expect standard/'obvious' meaning, since the player in question said this is what he taught his beginners(!).

AKJTxxx xxx xxx - Love all, RHO deals and passes. What's your action? (ETA: IMPs)

Assume strong partnership, but with only rudimentary agreements over 1N: 1N 2♣ / 2♥ 6♠ What sort of hand do you expect from responder?

In your head, perhaps?

All I see is a thread full of people boasting that their methods work on this hand. If you play a 1♠ rebid as an unbalanced hand, don't bid it here. If you don't and don't bid it here, what hand could you be waiting for? I've not seen anyone present evidence that either way is clearly better than the other.

I would not be tempted to act on North's hand. It can go horribly wrong, and P can see the vulnerability too. I have little preference between pass, X or 4♥ on the south hand.

With my softest values in the longest suit, I'm passing. It feels like a crapshoot, though.

[hv=pc=n&s=sat4hat954daj65c5&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1hp1sp]133|200[/hv] IMPs. Playing with a competent partner, but someone with whom you have very little system agreement other than '2/1 UDCA', what do you rebid here?

It had better be making four, since that's where those hands will put you if you bid. And with either one you're giving partner an absolutely perfect hand, but it still requires the preemptor to have the ace of the respective suit - fine if it's spades, comfortably under 50% if it's diamonds.

So what hand do you think he has that's worse than the one I posted above, and bids like this? I've been able to come up with one other - a two-suiter like x AKJx AKQxxx Ax. Those two persuade me that I should pass, but I feel like I should defend partner from the vague charge that he'd bid like this on a hand which might just have no realistic play for 13 tricks in 7♥, as you seem to imply if you think he could have a weaker hand than either of these.

[hv=pc=n&n=sakq85hq7642d7c54&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1d(14%2B%2C%20unbal%2C%20F1)p1sp1n(Any%2018%2B)p2c(Any%20GF%20without%20extreme%20shape)p2hp3hp4c(Mixed%20cue%2C%20bypassing%20Frivolous)p4sp4n(RKCB)p5c(1%20or%204)p5d(Trump%20queen%20ask)p5s(%2Bive%20response%20with%20the%20KS%20or%20%5BKD%20and%20KC%5D)p7hp]133|200[/hv] TL;DR for the auction: south has shown a monster with 5+ diamonds, 4 hearts and all the controls. Your bidding is consistent with AKxxx Qxxx x xxx (or xx xx, or xxx x in the minors). I was quite pleased with the auction here (mainly for having not gone off the rails for once), and 7♥ was cold barring a very unlikely first round ruff but after the dust had settled I wondered whether I should have corrected to 7N. It didn't even occur to me at the time with such a shapely hand, but I have at least one undisclosed trick in the Q♠, very likely another in the fifth heart. I'm now struggling to place partner with a hand where 7♥ is laydown and 7N isn't. The scoring was IMPs, so the only question is whether I can prove that 7N is more likely to make than 7♥. I thought I'd self-persuaded in writing this post, but changed my mind again. The hand I'm most worried about is - AKJx AKxxx AKxx, where partner's anticipating at worst three ruffs in the minors regardless of my distribution.