Jinksy

Swap the major suits and I'd hesitate. Here it seems like we've hit the jackpot.

What hand? xx AJT9x xxx Kxx probably isn't making 3 hearts, let alone 4. xx AJT9x Qxx Kxx must be odds against to make 4, and is pretty close to an opening hand. The tailor-made xx AJT9x AJxx xx gives us a decent game, but even if P passed with that originally, he's unlikely to pass 2♠ out. If I'm doubling it's more because I fear double part score swing than missing game, but it seems almost as likely that they're not making 2♠ and we're not making any (biddable) 3-level contract - and on top of that there's the possibility of critical damage at the three level, as on the actual hand.

So you're happy to play in 3♣? There are certainly hands where I'd do that for want of a better call, but with a comparatively small upside to getting it right here, it doesn't seem worth the risk.

'You' are the (unpassed) hand that's bid 3♦, in this sequence, so whether north passes presumably depends on whether you're playing a pull of his 2N as something ELC-like, or as a strong one- or two-suiter. I'd expect the latter to be better in the long run - what you lose on this hand, you gain on game and slam bidding.

Call me a wimp, but I'm leaning towards pass. Partner would need a perfect hand for us to have any shot at game, and I don't have a clear alternative call. Really dislike 3♥ - I'd prefer X, planning to pass 3♣, but anything we do might be trading +100 or +200 for a minus score. Can imagine Xing, esp if we don't play Lebensohl and I can bid 3♦ as ELC over 3♣.

I don't know much about Precision, but given the question as stated would bid 2♥ on the first and, if these options make any sense, bid 1N on the second, planning to defer my decision. If P passes I expect 1N will play well enough. If he rebids 2M, I'll raise (assuming this is actually an invitation), over 2♦ I'll bid a wimpy 2♠, and over 2♣ I'll bid 3♠.

I loathe IJSes to the extent that we've just given up on a certain subset of hands* to take them out of our system and replace them with a convention that doesn't both a) never come up and b) typically harm us when it does. This is in the context of Fantunes, where the values are shifted lower, which probably makes the sequence still less likely, but the change has been so successful that I'd need a lot of persuading to ever play them even in regular 2/1. * We bid the suit later, after a 1N response if in the range for an IJS, and just don't ever bid it if it's weaker, unless we can do it at the two level.

♠ 4 ♥ AQ96 ♦ AQ6 ♣ AQ962 In first seat, partner opens 4♠. Do you bid on - a) Vulnerable b) Non-vulnerable Of lesser importance, with no special agreements, if you do bid on, what do you bid?

West agreed that the system was clear and he'd forgotten it.

I'd be interested in the ruling for both cases: a) Suppose everyone agreed that W had seemed peevish when bidding 5♠, but E claimed it had played no part in his decision. b) Suppose everyone agreed that W had played phlegmatically and in tempo. When you say W corrected the explanation, how do you mean? The explanation of systemic agreements was correct - his bid was not. That said, he did make it clear before the OL that he had spades.

Suppose, if you will, the following: [hv=pc=n&w=sak976542h764dqc5&e=s3hajt8da94cj9873&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p2c(10-13HCP%2C%205%2BC)p4s(EKCB%20for%20Cs)p5d(2%20without)p5sppp]266|200[/hv] EW are playing a Fantunes style system. After the the 4♠ bid is alerted, north asks. E describes it as 'should be EKCB, if partner remembers'. When asked about his pass of 5♠, east says the follow-ups to EKCB aren't discussed, and that it seemed better odds that P had forgotten the system than that the opps had a 12-card spade fit unmentioned (though in case relevant, NS are playing strong twos). The director is called, since not everyone is happy with this explanation. There is also disagreement about whether W was visibly peevish when putting down the 5♠ bid. Suppose you were that director. What's your ruling?

In his book on preempts, Alan Mould recalls Brian Senior opening a third seat weak 2♦ on xxxx xxx Jxx xxx. Admittedly, at this vulnerability I imagine he'd have wanted a side-suit doubleton. You don't have to play an aggressive style if you don't like it, but a third seat preempt hasn't promised six of the suit since about 1970, let alone any number of honours. It is a captaining bid (which partner is not invited to respond to), so arguably it doesn't 'show' anything, any more than Stayman or RKCB need do.

Well you've proven that your assumptions about partner's bidding contradict each other, so what's left for anyone to say? This bidding is so far off the rails it can't even see the trains going by. Pass, and pray to any gods you happen to believe in that you're not going off 1 or 2 tricks.

2N seems far more likely to help the opps than us, but it's their hand, so I want to take up space - I'll opt for 2♥, or perhaps 2♠ if we need a swing.

I will happily bid 2♥ here, but I've trained my partners (through bitter experience) not to lead my preempted suits in such positions unless they really have no better prospect, nor to raise it unless they really have the nuts for their initial pass. If partner is unlikely to bid again and I'm this weak, then ODR isn't that relevant - the opps very likely have game and possibly slam, and I want to make it harder for them to find which (and which one).

Apparently this is a popular view, but is it really a guarantee? What is south to do with eg 1426 or 1417 or similar, especially with slam interest? He could bid 3♥ and pass 3N, or bid 3♥ and pull to 4♣? I've come around to the view that it's rarely right to cue below 3N, and that patterning out or just bidding values is worth more. It sometimes helps you find 3N, it helps P later distinguish a cuebid on Kxx from one on x, and generally helps him know how well the hands are working together. If 2N shows at least a hand with no shortage, then it doesn't seem like it can hurt much to play 3♥ over 3♣ as natural, allowing P to then start cueing for hearts (or showing values with 3♠!), or rebid 4♣ to set the suit. That gives you a chance to find your 4-4 fit, while potentially stopping a level lower, maybe playing in 3N when it's better than 5♣ (or 4N) or vice versa.

The auction probably stays interesting whatever you bid. Both hands: [hv=pc=n&w=sqt9543hak9daq8cj&e=sakhqj653djcqt864&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p1h2c2sp]266|200[/hv]

Sometimes, it pays to play against weak opponents. 1♠ looks like it would have been one off on a forcing heart defence, whereas had you passed it probably would have ended the hand.

What do they do over 1♠ with xxx AKJx KQJx KJx?

I don't think this is true. LHO has (presumably) a five-card spade suit, so (depending on style) might have strained to open. P has (presumably) a three-card spade suit, which isn't a 3-level double if he doesn't have >min opening values. If we give opener more of P's presumed spades, P needs slightly fewer values to have acted as he did, but so does opener. So I expect P to be something in the range of 2.5-3 points stronger than LHO on average.

I would be worried about partner passing a double. I would guess the archetypal hand for him here is a strong NT with no S stop. If I could bid a forcing 4♣ I'd be tempted to, since if P has no spade stop then 5♣ shouldn't be a bad spot even at MPs, so we might as well investigate slam properly - but I'm not sure whether it would be forcing, and still less sure whether my Ps would agree. Ergo 6.

Easy to say after the denouement, but I would just bid 4♠ here. If they raise to 5♣, P will know about my shortage as well as I do, so will be well placed to make the final decision. If he has no shortage of his own, we probably don't want to bid 5/5.

One day I'll learn to proofread my posts :\

♠ A K ♥ Q J 6 5 3 ♦ J ♣ Q 10 8 6 4 You open 1♥, LHO overcalls 2♣, P bids 2♠ (forcing), which comes back to you. I don't know the vul - this was passed to me. Assume scoring is some form of imps. What's your call?

I think this is wrong. I'm not sure whether/how much a priori odds affect the exact probability, but with 9 cards known in the opps' hands, giving RHO exactly 4, there's 8 empty spaces in LHO's hand and 13 in P's, so LHO rates to have approx 1.6 of the outstanding spades. Sure, I don't expect much power. But I'm saying we shouldn't downgrade both for quacks and for their positioning. We have a hand with bad honours, well positioned. If partner has a red suit ace, we might well be able to bring that suit in for no losers. In any suit where he lacks either honour, subject to them not ruffing the third round, we rate not to have more than two losers.