A. 3D. Partner figures to be 4=3=5=1. Passing 3CX looks like aiming for a one-trick set with the huge downside of conceding 470 if wrong. Let’s play this in our 8-card fit and try to make.
B. Dbl. 4N would be clear at IMPs. At matchpoints I’m willing to risk -790 for more accurate bidding, including playing this in spades when it’s right.
C. 2D. Pass is a close second, and 1S isn’t crazy. If partner has a max, I’ll hear his four-card major if he has one. Otherwise, I might have just coaxed the opponents into overbidding.
D. 2H. They’ve already bid my short suit, so it’s more important to get across my values than to preempt.
E. 2H. I would pass at IMPs or with vul opponents, but I can’t settle for a likely 100 when we make at least 110.
F. 2C. This is standard. Untangling an auction like 1S-2D-3C- is not something you want to do if you don’t have to.
G. 1H. I wish I could bid 2D, but that’s anti-system. It’s too likely partner has a 4=4=3=2 weak NT or the like and any bid but 1H goes badly.
H. CA. It’s IMPs, and this seems to have good chances of a set on the go. It’s slightly riskier than a diamond, but a diamond has less upside.



