Jinksy

Slightly lean toward a heart, though spade looks comparable (a heart unlike a spade might just set up a tempo trick). Don't have any interest in leading from either of the other suits.

The whowhenacle?

Teams, competent scratch partner: [hv=pc=n&s=s94hak6dq953ca763&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=pp1c3sdp]133|200[/hv] Maybe I'm a muppet for opening 1♣, but I was planning to pass any response partner made.

I started out writing that splintering on this hand is nuts, then persuaded myself otherwise. I think it's just about the range that if I splinter and P signs off, I still want to be in small (subject to enough KCs), and if I splinter and he encourages, I want to be in grand (with same caveat).

Playing our version of Fantunes I think we'd stumble into it marginally more convincingly: 1N* 3S** / 3N 4D / 4H 4S / 5C*** 5D**** / 6D***** *12-14, may contain this shape, obv ** GF with 5-5 in the minors *** cue with Turbo, ie odd number of KCs **** signing off (and praying to any sympathetic deities) if only one ***** Nothing else to say Lots of ways this could lead to a bad slam (or bad 5m) on a different day, but I don't think S can give up on a minor game after 3N, and having bid 3N, N's about as good as he can be (even allowing for wasted jacks) when P bids 4♦, so he needs to give some encouragement IMO.

Despite having mixed in a second pack you've only got two aces between you (and I only count 11 tricks if you convert the K♦ to the ace), so I'd say you're a little short.

That doesn't seem like pure penalties. I'd expect a lot of 6-counts to balance (and I'd consider it having their bid).

1) 2♥. No reason to give declarer honest count, but we'd better set up hearts fast. I'd like to know whether N's bid was weak or constructive, but probably making the same lead either way. (ETA - hadn't noticed this was MPs. It's less clear, but I'll still lead the heart, since there's no reason to assume everyone in the room is in this contract) 2) Close between a heart and a spade. I'll go for a spade since it sounds unlikely declarer has enough length for it to cause disaster, whereas the H might pick up P's Q. 3) Probably K♣ against competent opponents. Against average-minus club players, I'd be worried they just bid this because they had six hearts and couldn't think of any other bid, in which case they might belong in 3N and clubs might pick up the suit for them - in that situation, prob a small heart. 4) T♠.

That's kind of reassuring. I can never hold a complete hand in my head (even my own). And as Calvin (of & Hobbes) once said - 'You know how Einstein got bad grades in school? Well mine are even worse'.

I'm curious if I'm in the minority here. Straw poll - how many people think: a) 2♦ is an xfer here undiscussed with a competent pickup partner, b) 2♦ should be an xfer here after discussion ?

Sure. My comment was mostly diana-bashing :P I would have just bid 2♥, then facepalmed in disbelief if (when?) my P bid 2♠ over it.

Misunderstanding schmisunderstanding. The only excuse for E's 3N bid is he thought P's 2♣ opening was Precision.

Ok... and since West doesn't hold 'a long good ♦ suit', how will they successfully penalise 2♦?

Ignore all loomis. He sounds like he's a sock puppet of your partner making a desperate effort to make himself seem less of a cretin. Penalising 2♦ would be nice, but difficult even in an experienced partnership, IMO. With diamonds (and the honours) split so evenly between the two suits, neither of you has a full blooded penalty double (or penalty pass, depending on whether you think you're playing TO doubles). E's hand is closest, but given that he's almost certain you have slam on, trying for penalties at the 2-level with KTx doesn't seem like a great proposition.

I dislike exit xfers as a convention, but my main complaint is that I wouldn't dream of pulling 2D to 2H! Undiscussed after a double it seems like it would obviously be weak and natural.

Agree with everything the others said, and also your P's XX was a really horrible call designed to completely mess up the bidding in a scratch partnership. Undiscussed bids in new partnerships are natural unless they can't possibly be natural - so here XX should be 'I've got good clubs, so I suggest we play right here, P'. He's lucky you had his clubs for him, or you could have ended up defending 2♣XX making (with slam on your way).

Am I the only one who thinks 2♦ as an xfer is a really bad approach here? Undiscussed I would have just thought it was a retreat to diamonds unless we'd specifically agreed both 'exit transfers if they double our 1N opening' and 'system on when we overcall bid 1N as an overcall'. And exit transfers IMO are uniquely bad as a runout over 1N doubled. You let them show about 4x as many hand types, half without rescuing you from the wriggle, just so you can hide the better defined hand. Anyway, pass :P Also, I would think P's X asks for a diamond lead.

What extra values do we want to show? If P can't muster more than 1M, I doubt this nasty 17 count will give such a good play for game that we lose much in expectation by playing at the 1-level.

That seems more like a rationale for takeout doubles - now responder won't X with no points and the hand doesn't get bid.

And down your drink with a stiff beer card.

I might have stretched to 2♠ the first time around. Having decided against it then, I can't imagine a reason to bid it now.

This seems weird to me. Wherever you have asymmetrical doubles, your partnership can only bid half as many hands.

1♥ 1♠ / 3♠ or 1♥ 1♠ / 4♠ What does opener have on these hands?

I would. Our own honours are placed about as perfectly as they could be on the bidding. Also if P has either top H honour, we might be scoring badly against anyone who found 6N anyway - and if he doesn't then our values will be working even better together. Ignoring the EW hands (is it worth posting them? It makes the post harder to read, and they're not really relevant to our decision), I imagine I'd have bid the same as South up to his pass. North's jump to 6♦ seems pushy, but maybe is right at MPs.

I bid a few with myself playing a weak NT, and the impression I got is that opener should just pass when rejecting, since often 2N was off with 2S making even on a 5-2. That said, I wasn't paying much attention to the possibility of playing in a second suit.