1♥ could be as bad as xxx, QJTx, x, xxxxx for me :P

So where do I rank this hand (hmm).

As Simon.

Play 2♦ as Mild INV here and 2N as a more clearcut game-try. All bids higher than 2♥ are as per 1♥-2♥.

Definitely bidding. Partner has 6♥-5m or 7♥-4m and wants us to pass only if we have a penalty double of 4♠.

Bidding 5♣ as the info both sides give might help us judge 5♠ vs 6level better.

in which case they have 5♥ and a FNJ. If partner doubles then they have even more dummy ruffing potential.

Not convinced by the line of logic that defending 2♥x is right. RHO almost certainly has 6♥ and possibly a Fit Non Jump with ♦ which we cannot shorten sufficiently to take control fast enough. Hands like x, AKQTxx, xx, xxxx spring to mind where 2♥ x looks to be in rude health, no? We are basically gambling on the black suit breaks + partner not straining too hard it seems.

Floating between 3♣ and 3♦. Don't think 2N is right at all as LHO will lead stiff through partners possible Kx. Pass could be right but I feel 3N is too likely to be on the cards.

Hopefully 3♣ will show partner interest (they will put me on approx 6♣ + outside A) and then they can judge accurately whether 3N is good. The problem with this is we hold the A♠. This is a really bad card for our hand as it means partner cannot be sure whether Kxxxx, Ax, xxx, xxx is 9 tricks.

Tempted by 3♦ but the vuln and the fact that Niall is likely my partner makes me stray to the conservative action.

Since I guessed/proposed the 4♦ two-way treatment, I should say that Andy is technically correct. However, I also think a sign-off is more important than a diamond slam-try full stop.

The hand we have picked up is among the most powerful “without shortage” hands that we can pick up and it is still borderline sign-off after 3N-4♣. This tells me that we definitely need a sign-off. If you do want the diamond slam-try then the two-way bid seems like a reasonable compromise.

See my point above as to why I would long suit try in ♥. Hopefully, partner will move with heart cards or heart length+other values which is probably our best shot.

Neither do I, since for me a mixed raise contains shortage. However, I think they both fall within the parameters specified. 4333 is apparently on the border

Kxxx, xxxx, KQx, xx is a better example as you won't need to pick up ♣.

Richard has somewhat illustrated my point. To my mind, you bid 3N primarily to hear shortages from partner and evaluate accordingly. If partner bids 4♣ you will want to do 2 things:

a) Stop in 4♠ as you needed shortage from partner
b) Make another slam try.

Since I know Frances puts a lot of work into her system, I was curious. My initial guess was:
3N-4♣
4♦ = Slam try with ♦ or Sign-off in 4♠

then:
4♥ = Which was it please?
4♠ = No interest opposite either

This also works over 1♥-3♥ assuming 3♠ is now the ask. There are other solutions but this seemed to fit most easily into the above structure.
………………………………..

So on the particular hand if we can bid 3N “free of charge” then we definitely should since some days partner will show ♥ shortage which is great for us. To my mind then the problem becomes what to do over 3N-4♣.

Assuming we have no sign-off option and we have bid 3N, I would probably make a slam try in ♥ over 4♣. Partner is often 4=3=4=2 or 4=2=4=3 so I have reasonable chances of making all 4♣ regardless of their club holding. Therefore it makes sense to get them to evaluate for ♥.

(Sorry btw about not reading the problem properly but was rushing out)

Also 4♦ over 4♣ after 3N. Is this natural or could it also be a sign-off?

Hovering between 3N and a sign-off. Nothing else is really in the equation for me.

Cool hand. Thanks for posting

More likely some opened 3♥ on the East cards.

Would like to see Jolly in action as I think they deserve it. Also from a European/English perspective would like to see Lavazza vs Bowley.

Not so bothered about the other two. Gupta vs Lebowitz could be a cracker as could Rigal vs Fireman.

Thanks for all the great work you do.

In the interview he comes across as patriotic in several places. I think this is slightly different to the NBA…

Note, I am not criticising them or viewing the move negatively. In fact as mentioned, the situation in Italy makes it rather understandable. The surprise comes from my personal view that if you are patriotic, it is not something that changes easily.

“How do you feel when you see two Italians who have gone to play under a foreign flag?”

Lauria: “I would never have done this.”

In light of this, I feel slightly bemused. Tbf to L-V, there has been a somewhat seismic shift in Italian bridge over the last few years. Still surprised though.

Reference: http://neapolitanclub.altervista.org/eng/lorenzo-lauria-i-like-competitive-bridge-interview.html

T/O, values whatever you want to call it.

They don't have KQxx ♦ at any rate.