bucky

How about showing diamonds? :)

Pretty odd... Isn't double of 1♣ supposed to be based on shortness in clubs? Anyway, I think when opponents interfere, you need more ways to compete (at the cost of less ways to invite). So 2♦ will be natural (and non-forcing) for me. For this hand, 4♠ seems more straightforward. In fact, even without interference (i.e. XYZ is available), I'd probably still bid a direct 4♠.

I don't think XYZ should be when opps compete after 1Z. BTW what does 2♣ show?

Half of my high cards are in short suits, which argues for 2NT. If your hand were xx, AKQx, AKQxx, xx, same shape and high cards, but now 2H is more descriptive.

I'd add that East probably made the same mistake. North made a bad bid which probably was saved by East, and then un-saved by South. North made the first mistake, and South made the last. If I am to ATB, I would say, 100% north and 100% south.

I concur that my original argument was directly mostly on strong NT openings. Against weak NT openings most defenses enlist penalty double, or artificial doubles that carry at least mild penalty tone. Since the double will be left in quite often, then the shifted odds may justify a different counter-treatment.

I think it depends on the value promised in the artificial X. At least for the strong NT opening case, most of artificial doubles are not going to be left in, so the responder doesn't get to use this "force opener to XX then pass to show value" tool very often. If the "trap pass" is not going to frequently work as planned, it may be better off to directly use XX to show value (and set up force in subsequent biddings).

Mandatory? I am guessing you only have experience of a strong NT. I would suggest to you that the vast majority of weak and mini NTers play XX here in some conventional way. Some play it as any 1-suiter, some as clubs, some as a weak 4333 hand. But very very few play it as business. I can only say that you guessed wrong. :) Please also note my qualifying term "over artificial X". Over penalty X it makes sense to use XX as conventional. When opponents make an artificial double (which is often based on shape instead of value), you have a better chance of holding a good hand and it is logical to use XX to show it.

You are kidding, right? I think over artificial X of 1NT, it is almost mandatory to play XX as business. Also, the word "takeout" seems strange here; no suit has been bid, and I couldn't grasp the concept of "4-suit takeout".

I cannot disagree more. This hand SCREAMS for defense: ♦K, ♣KQJ, and quick tricks in spades. I am also assuming that we don't have huge spade fit; with 4+ spades and a weak hand, partner could've/should've made a preemptive raise.

Yes, but I don't think it would have accomplished anything on this hand, except eventually still having to make a decision over their 5D. Agree. With the actual distribution, it is not a time for science. I think the 5♣ bid is fine, an initial 6♣ has lots of merits too.

I think double is clear. It shows general value rather than trump stack. What is your partner's hand? I suspect the 2♠ bid or pass of double are questionable.

4♠ in this auction should have special meaning -- since 3♠ would have been forcing. But since you probably haven't had this discussion with the pick-up partner, passing seems automatic. With ace other than KQs in side suit (H/C), I would be a bit more concerned but still would pass.

Why would I start with 2♣? What is your plan if partner responds 2♦?

Just because 5♥ is a fine result doesn't mean YOU will have to bid it immediately. Doesn't partner get to take another bid? How would you feel if you bid 5♥ and partner raises to 6, only to find being -1?

1N vs 1♠ is not a totally unrelated topic. Knowing whether partner tends to have 5+ clubs and/or an unbalanced hand, that will help you evaluate your hand and plan the auction accordingly. In my treatment, the responder would bid 2♦ initially. This bid shows diamonds or D+C, and game-force value (but doesn't have to have slam aspiration). It may be a slight overbid, but I think the stretch is worthwhile with my shortage in the majors.

It seems to be a recent trend to bid (a much weaker) 4-card suit with 4-6 combination.

What do you use 2NT for then? Natural?

Wouldn't 3 and 4 point to bidding more than 3♠?

It is fairly common to play that after 2/1, 2M rebid doesn't promise 6+ cards, and that 1♥-2♣-2♠ shows extra (which means 1♥-2♣-2♥ doesn't deny 4 spades either). Of course that is not the only way of playing 2/1, but I think you will find plenty of players (and majority of experts) who DON'T play the way you described. That being said, I do agree that 2♠ is not a good bid. Once you decide to start the auction with 2♣ (which has merits and problems), you should give up finding 4-4 spade fit after partner rebids 2♥. The 2♠ bid implies a much better club suit. I think a simple 2NT is best here. If partner raises to 3NT, you can bid quant 4NT. If partner rebids 3♥ (as he should for this hand), you can start cuebidding.

As it is nearly impossible to convince people they have bad bidding habits, I would advise simply to stop playing with them. In order to upgrade your game, you have to play with a partner who has *some* sanity in bidding.

Before bidding, ask yourself this question: if we end up playing in NT, which side would you like to be declaring? This tells you to look at your holding in the majors. If you have soft value in the majors, bid 1NT. If you have concentrated value in minors, bid 1♦.

A delayed raise in this situation (excused as "only when needed") indicates a habit resulted from playing in weak fields too often.

2♥ is just a general GF bid, it could be based on spade fit, strong clubs, or a balanced strong hand without good heart stopper. The responder should give opener some room to describe which hand type he holds. So 3♣ bid is much better in that it conserves bidding room. Opener can now bid 3♠ to show 3-card spade support. This will significantly simplify the rest of bidding. A sophisticated partnership can also think about using 6 keycard blackwood (for clubs and spades) after the double fit is discovered, which may enable the partnership to confidently reach 7♣ contract. As a side note, fit-showing (by passed hand) is a logic and useful treatment for the responder hand.

I agree, without discussion, 4♥ sets the strain. Any further non-heart suit bid by opener should be cuebid. Similarly, if one opens 4♠ and partner bids 5♣, that is cuebid (or, by agreement, control-asking bid), not to play.