bucky

Hmm other tables may have opened 1♣ instead of 1NT then, and partner might have overcalled 2♣...

Why would I feel sick? Assuming 2♦ is conventional (asking partner's better major), this is an easy pass. I should actually feel better since we might beat all pairs that use DONT.

OK... thought that would be obvious. :)

Not much better, but slightly better. At least if you bid 3♠ now, partner will play you for just 4-card suit, and partner also knows you have a balanced hand. 1NT in standard opening is much more descriptive than the precision 1♣ for this hand.

Hmm, what did I miss? With good and flexible hand I double then bid diamonds; with solid diamonds but need partner to have club stopper, I bid 3♣; with solid diamonds and club stopper I bid NT myself; a direct jump to 3♦ shows good diamonds but not good enough for 3♣/3NT call. My main point was that, I did't like the suggestion of using double-first to show/deny stopper.

LOL.

So what kind of hand would you cuebid? I don't think 7-card fits should be always avoided either, but I want to avoid BAD moysian contracts.

Of course. But why would you want partner to lead diamond in this case? The declarer will probably need to set up diamonds, so you actually want a non-diamond lead to establish another trick before diamonds get set up. A more logical explanation is that doubler has diamond void (and in such a case, leading a diamond does beat the slam). But of course, the double turned out to be just random, I doubt that it was even intended for lead directing.

In general I don't want to play in 7-card fit at 3-level. I have good defense. Even if we make the contract, it will be very likely that 3♦ will go down, and +50/100/150 is not a disaster in IMP, but turning a plus to minus is.

I think double shows a more flexible hand. So double then 3♦ shows something like 3361 shape. With a solid diamond suit and just looking for club stopper, you can cuebid 3♣.

Precision 1♣ opening is more vulnerable to preemptive bids. There is no perfect solution, you just have to guess, and make up the loss by gaining on other sequences.

2 possible choices I can see: 1) 5♥ is also 2 places to play, one of them being spades. 2) 5♥ is a slam try in spades WITH HEART CONTROL, while 5♠ would be ASKING for heart control. I'd vote for the second option.

Although 4M with moysian fits can be the best game contract in some cases, I don't see why the doubler would not investigate on alternative strains before committing to it. If the doubler has good enough a hand to bid game based on 3-card fit, why not cuebid 3m to find out more?

I think the real answer to this question is to have agreement with partner. But if you just want to talk about the treatment based on merit, I'd vote for non-forcing but constructive. It is important to be able to compete, especially when your suit is major. Also, the 1♦ overcall can be relatively light, so you need a really big hand to want to absolutely force the auction (or a hand with hearts plus diamond fit, which can be shown by 3♥). Therefore, based on frequency, I think it is more optimal to use 2♥ here as encouraging, partner should bid again with a good hand or with heart fit. In the rare case that you have a huge hand and want to force no matter what, you'd have to either jump to 4♥ or overload the 3♣ cuebid.

Of course people can make up agreements (or impression of agreements). All the bridge books I've read teach me that 2♣ here is non-forcing. Maybe many do treat it as forcing in practice, but I've also learned that many don't know what's standard when they think they do (I am not referring to any particular person)...

Declarer should maximize his chance by not touching the hearts. Just play off the diamonds (pitching a club in hand). The only card west can throw to break the progressive squeeze is CJ, but with C10 in dummy and declarer's hand hidden, that defense is far more difficult than after declarer cashed hearts first. Even West found that defense, on C10 (declarer pitching S4), West is put to yet another test of pseudo squeeze: did declarer start with 4 spades ATxx, or 4 hearts?

I expect a pickup partner to treat 2NT as value bid (and 2♣ after the X to be non-forcing). That is quite standard (of course being standard doesn't mean it is the only way to play, but it means that's what we play without discussion). But if you are referring to "pickup partner on BBO", then all bets are off, anything can happen, ANYTHING...

Even a reopening double is questionable (but probably better than the 3♥ call). When partner cannot make a responsive double, does North have to compete at 3-level with this hand?

It wasn't a Lightner double (the doubler doesn't have any void suit)... just an amusing story put together by clueless defender and declarer.

Play a diamond to A, dropping ♦K in East hand, end up making one more trick than an expert would have? :)

Sorry, of course it was a joke. What I meant to say is that, double is a much less descriptive bid than 4♠, although it probably worked better for this particular layout. Also note that the good result you had might be more of a function of opponent's silly bidding, but that is not something based on which you want to judge the success of certain bids.

If you have agreement that X here shows stiff club and 6th spade and good hand, then it is a perfect action.

This hand has some good and bad features. The void in partner's long suit is definitely worrisome. If partner has minimum hand with soft value in spades and only 3 clubs, I won't be surprised if 3♣ is the limit, especially when opponents start by leading trumps. I think 3♣ is quite appropriate, although you may feel having something in reserve. 3NT is very poor.

What do you bid over 1♣ with xx,xx,Kxx,AKQxxx ? Pass... what else?? You don't / shouldn't double just to show you have an opening hand. Perhaps this post belongs to B/I.

1♠ then 3NT. I dislike the 3♦ call. I have such weak spades that I don't care for playing 4-3 fit. I will regret it if partner has a small stiff heart. But otherwise 3NT rates to be a reasonable contract even if we lack heart stopper.