[jillybean]

---

IMPs. such a fun Team Game tonight.

[mikeh]

It’s a pure guess thanks to a very odd bid by partner. WTF was he thinking? 2H doesn’t show spades in any method that id ever want to play. It simply sets up a gf and both asks partner to tell me something about his hand (primarily but by no means only about heart stop, diamond fit, extra clubs, etc) and says ‘I’m forcing to game and I’ll tell you why in a moment’.

4S is a DNE call….as in…it doesn’t exist.

There is no right answer. I’m sure there’s an answer that ‘works’ but there is no logical way of working it out.

Even knowing that south didn’t open 2H and north passed over 1S doesn’t help. North has very few points and probably lacks the shape to get involved.

To paraphrase Sabine Auken, in a different context, if I were asked by an opp what 4S meant, I’d say ‘it means he wants out of this partnership’. Which I’d be delighted to accept.

[mr1303]

Trying to come up with hands where a 4♠ bid might even be tempting. I can only really come up with weakish 6-7, or perhaps 5-6 hands. I'm going to roll out the old Black here, and see what happens. If slam goes off here, then almost certainly 4 spades was the call that was to blame, not my 4NT.

[mw64ahw]

Why 1♦ rather than 1♠? The minor suit game is the last contract to look for and the level of West's response to 1♠ will help any judgement on a slam try.

2♥ is forcing, but could be done on 2353 without a ♥ stopper. 4♠ sounds like West thinks 2♥ is unassuming.

As it stands East should Pass unless 2♥ is unassuming showing at least a limit raise.

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2026-October-18, 23:45, said:

Why 1♦ rather than 1♠? The minor suit game is the last contract to look for and the level of West's response to 1♠ will help any judgement on a slam try.

2♥ is forcing, but could be done on 2353 without a ♥ stopper. 4♠ sounds like West thinks 2♥ is unassuming.

As it stands East should Pass unless 2♥ is unassuming showing at least a limit raise.

1♦ is normal to many people, 1♠ is then 5 or 4333.

Partner should have something extreme, 5(10)7 or similar and probably 9-10 points. I'm assuming with a minimum you would open 1♠ with a 5-6.

If partner has done this with a balanced 12, get a new partner.

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-October-19, 02:39, said:

1♦ is normal to many people, 1♠ is then 5 or 4333.

Partner should have something extreme, 5(10)7 or similar and probably 9-10 points. I'm assuming with a minimum you would open 1♠ with a 5-6.

If partner has done this with a balanced 12, get a new partner.

1♦ with 5♦ maybe, playing SA or 2/1 otherwise I would have thought 1♠ would be standard.
Playing Acol I'd bid up the line with 4-card suits.

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2026-October-19, 02:59, said:

1♦ with 5♦ maybe, playing SA or 2/1 otherwise I would have thought 1♠ would be standard.
Playing Acol I'd bid up the line with 4-card suits.

Do you do this only with good hands or all the time ?

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-October-19, 04:13, said:

Do you do this only with good hands or all the time ?

I play TW with SA partners so not applicable.
I take lead from Acol partners, but tends to be all the time.

[pescetom]

 mw64ahw, on 2026-October-19, 02:59, said:

1♦ with 5♦ maybe, playing SA or 2/1 otherwise I would have thought 1♠ would be standard.
Playing Acol I'd bid up the line with 4-card suits.

Playing 2/1 in Italy you can't make any assumptions, the agreement could be anything from up the line even with a minimum to full blown Walsh, with lots of variations in-between. You have to discuss with partner and some times ask opponents (bypassing diamonds is theoretically alertable but that rarely happens and indeed would be treated with suspicion or the wrong assumption that you are playing transfer Walsh).
On the positive side, it's one of those discussions that help you evaluate partner (some do not know when they bypass diamonds or will not do what they say).

[Cyberyeti]

mw64ahw, on 2026-October-19, 04:17, said:

I play TW with SA partners so not applicable.
I take lead from Acol partners, but tends to be all the time.

I learned my lesson actually with a minimum 4441.

partner was 3145 minimum, I responded 1♥, partner bid 2♣ and there we played, this was not optimal.

[mw64ahw]

Cyberyeti, on 2026-October-19, 05:13, said:

I learned my lesson actually with a minimum 4441.

partner was 3145 minimum, I responded 1♥, partner bid 2♣ and there we played, this was not optimal.

I'd open 1♦ there and end in 2♠ playing my unbalanced ♦.
Not sure what Acol partners would do, but I may bid the 3-card Spade suit happy to play in the Moysian being unable to bid 1N.

[jillybean]

I felt as if I were standing on the edge of an abyss, but I wasn't ready to stop.

---

I'm happy with my 5♠ bid above.
Here's the full hand, we have not had chance to discuss the bidding.

---

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 05:38, said:

I felt as if I were standing on the edge of an abyss, but I wasn't ready to stop.

---

So what exactly was the agreement regarding 2♥?

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2026-October-19, 05:45, said:

So what exactly was the agreement regarding 2♥?

I think it is just bridge, forcing, tell me more about your hand.

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2026-October-18, 23:45, said:

Why 1♦ rather than 1♠?

I could have bid 1♠, we have no agreement other than no walsh.
I find it best to go low and slow with gf 4♦ and a 4cM

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 05:49, said:

I think it is just bridge, forcing, tell me more about your hand.

I think it's an awkward way to get around the limitations of natural bidding after a 1 level rebid (although it would work out well here if partner bids 3♣ and takes 2♥ as GF, as you say).
Agree to play XYZ and now you can raise spades with a game forcing 3♠, partner control bids 4♣ and you're off to the races.

[mw64ahw]

jillybean, on 2026-October-19, 05:38, said:

I felt as if I were standing on the edge of an abyss, but I wasn't ready to stop.

---

I'm happy with my 5♠ bid above.
Here's the full hand, we have not had chance to discuss the bidding.

---

That bidding looks better and sets Spades at the 3-level ready for the slam try assuming 2♥ is GF

[jillybean]

pescetom, on 2026-October-19, 06:15, said:

I think it's an awkward way to get around the limitations of natural bidding after a 1 level rebid (although it would work out well here if partner bids 3♣ and takes 2♥ as GF, as you say).
Agree to play XYZ and now you can raise spades with a game forcing 3♠, partner control bids 4♣ and you're off to the races.

We play XYZ, JKL, and GHI.
In this part of the world, I believe it is standard to play XYZ off in a competitive auction.

[jillybean]

mw64ahw, on 2026-October-19, 06:26, said:

That bidding looks better and sets Spades at the 3-level ready for the slam try assuming 2♥ is GF

Yes. I will be discussing the original auction further

[mike777]

Please note playing Walsh style rather than up the line
Responder with 5D and 4 spades could start with 1D then simply raise one spade to two spades as gf.

Agree on this hand I would start with one spade since only 4D.

Funny enough that means 2H here denied 4S
Playing Walsh, which I would assume