Jinksy

[hv=pc=n&s=saj9732hkj8642dc5&n=sk5ha75d75cakt986&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=2np3np4dp4np5np6hppp]266|200[/hv] I just enjoyed the way this auction could look superficially natural if you squint hard enough, despite the fact that every single NT bid was artificial :) 2N opening showed 5+-5+, Spades and either hearts or clubs (nominally 10-13 points, same playing strength as Fantunes 2-bids) 3N shows slam interest in whatever my second suit is 4D is a cue for hearts 4N is RKCB 5N is even KC count with a working void

Does this have any effect on what you consider a H stop? It seems like it could affect edge cases either way - eg not playing this system, 3H over 2N could be (I don't know if it normally would be) a check back against the solidarity of the stop, whereas playing it means you can't do so - so perhaps 2N needs a more robust stop in the first place. Against that, since 3H with this system suggests a hand that's got fewer average Hs than it would without this system, if you bid it on eg Qxx, partner's never going to take a punt on his Jxx, so you might miss 3N. Or do you just go with the 'life's too short' approach in any system, and decide a stop's a stop?

At this vul I'd have responded 3♠ as W (assuming four spades).

I would also play as values, fwiw. Out of curiosity, how do those who play it the same treat the second double in sequence like this: 1N* X 2C** X * still 12-14 ** showing something other than clubs (eg exit transfer) Atm we play it as something analogous to the OP X - showing 'values', though in this case where 'values' just means 'confirming we have the majority of the points', ie a decent 6+. Do others have similar agreements?

Hm, I hadn't heard that argument. Have you tested it much? My sense of playing weak NT in 4th (which I've done a lot perforce), is that it's a loser whenever you have good spades or a minimum. In the former case, you can get outcompeted by opps when it's your part score, in the latter partner too often raises you to 2N (which I don't think your scheme really helps with, since invites still take us to the 3 level). If I have a maximum with poor spades, maybe it's advantageous (and max is presumably more likely than min given that strong NT is more likely than weak) to open - but then we're trading a valuable strong NT opening for gains from a single corner of weak-NT-space. Even then though, my sense is that they'll often be able to bid spades, and that possibly we've done even worse if we now can't find our 8-9 card fit in a lower ranking suit.

Wtp pass for me. If I bid 2♠ and hit partner with a max and three card support, I don't know how we're finding our way to 10 tricks. I play all suit bids as forcing, though. Think I'd still pass if I didn't, but it makes the decision easier. As for your partner's call, that looks like a 1♥ bid to me, or pass if that's too uncomfortable.

First in favourable, I think it pays to pre-empt aggressively, and would open 3♠ as long as my P was on the same page. Third in, I wouldn't bother to check the page.

If the megaquiz taught me anything, it's that I'm constitutionally incapable of passing on this sort of hand, for better or worse.

It looks like a reasonable structure, but why play a weak NT opposite a passed hand at all? I love the weak NT, but even I find it gets in the way in third (and perhaps even more in fourth) seat.

Without having looked at any of the replies yet (which I'll now do), I would lead a small diamond if partner's X of Stayman would have shown clubs, otherwise I'd lead a small club, on both questions (on the assumption that it would, I've voted for a D atm). If we're beating this, P's going to need to show up with some values and probably a 5-card suit to set up. On this auction, that's at least as likely to be a minor as a major, and I have much more to offer in the minors (and, correspondingly, he has a less robust suit in expectation to match his lack of overcall over Stayman), so it's a choice of the minors. I imagine he'd X 2♣ on a lot of hands that wouldn't bid 2♦ with the minors reversed, so that's enough for me (subject to above caveat) to risk what would normally feel like a suicidal lead from KTx.

If you're going to cue, would 5♣ be an option? I wouldn't risk it at the table, but I can see an argument that with a strong hand with a huge C suit, you'd have just chosen the level of your contract and bid it.

I dislike not cueing way more than I dislike punting. You have a max with good shape and a fifth diamond P has no right to expect - and, despite what I said above, this is MPs - bidding aggressive slams when you're committed to 4+ minor is clearly more appealing than at IMPs.

I think you'd cash the A with more hope of setting the contract with these, but even with xx of trumps, the A lead would look appealing from most holdings to me. Maybe least so from a short suit - Ax, Axx or similar - but I'd prob still do it unless I had a long side suit and hoped to give P a first round ruff (unlikely here, since if it were clubs I'd trust in partner's lack of Lightner X). It's pretty unusual to lead a singleton against a slam holding working keycard. You get all the usual risk, and very little benefit. Yeah. Does that follow? E had a much easier overcall than W, so I would have thought it points to greater non-trump-length (and hence shorter trumps) with W. I don't understand. Do you mean to try to minimise undertricks? Based on the above (primarily on E's failure to overcall, and the relative HCP shortage in our hands), I feel like the best trump play might be to finesse E for the trump Q. But on this sort of hand there might be other considerations. If trumps are 4-0, we won't be able to ruff 2♥s and still pick the QT up, and if Cs are also 4-1, we might have communication problems setting them up. On those grounds, maybe playing for the drop is better even if it is marginally worse in isolation.

How will you continue if P bids 4♠?

I'm Passercus!

Not that XXX looks like any kind of plus, but isn't it significantly worse when hearts were bid to your right? Here you might still hope to find some working points in your side's heart suit (though I certainly would not overcall first round on this hand).

Cuebid seems automatic to me. Screw this bollocks about 'having to bid slam or get a bad score'. If the opps have an AK to cash, they're probably going to find it (N should just lead the A if he has it, and with both AK S might find a lightner X). We can't be the only other pair in the room to have investigated slam with a fitting 32 count, so I'll take my safe average-minus rather than play for an unlikely top. All that said, I don't like E's 1♥ response. As PhilKing said in another thread, my grandma told me not to bid bad suits on good hands (presumably we share a grandma), and this seems like a clear example, especially if 1♦ promised four of them. I'd just make whatever our strong minor raise is, and not try to discourage P from later cueing heart shortage.

I wasn't sure on the last hand, but I think I'd bid here. My hand is stronger, shorter holding in their suit seems more relevant than more points wasted in it, and the K has way more potential to be an actual trick than the Q.

[hv=pc=n&s=sajt53hq98dkq5ct7&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=1hp1np2hpp]133|200[/hv] IMP teams.

On the actual hand, I like double, but maybe that's related to my sig - I wouldn't expect to find slam in a million years if I bid 4♠ on this. Meanwhile, if P has a balanced hand with a handful of points, we probably do almost as well in expectation defending as playing. If he pulls to 5♣, I expect him to have enough clubs that we've got a reasonable chance of making it. If he bids either of the other suits, I'll raise him a level.

Voted for 2♥ and then it sank in that it wasn't 4sf. Sheesh, how did those old bridge players survive in the dark ages? I dunno. 2N I guess. At total points, I don't want to be missing vulnerable games. Maybe I should bid 3N, but I can't bring myself to be that optimistic with no stop. P can see the scoring/vul too, and will presumably raise with about a jack or half stop to spare.

On this system, 3♠ would presumably be a GF? If so, I'll opt for a conservative 2S, and maybe think about some more bidding if LHO raises hearts.

I know it's uncouth to post this sort of thing here, but in case anyone is interested: PhilG007's bboskill rating: 1522 MrAce's bboskill rating: 2227 (this is after 15672 and 8117 boards respectively, so their skills probably haven't evolved too much since then)

1♠ looks tempting, but 3♥.

'Wide ranging' maybe isn't well enough defined. Opposite what that means when my partners use it in this position, pass in sleep.