Bidding is not always an exact science by Bobby Wolff

A: Pass: If your partner cannot break the transfer, do you really have enough to try for game? I say no. You would need to have stronger spade spots or better honor structure than your actual hand. While you might make game facing the right maximum, the odds are heavily against it.

Your result so far:

A: 4♥: When you jumped to four clubs, you bid your whole hand at once. Yes, you have a spade control, but in context, you have no extras. If partner cannot move over four hearts, you won't have missed anything. With the diamond queen instead of the jack, you might do more now.

Your result so far:

A: 3♦: Clearly, you will raise hearts, but what is the right way to do that? A pre-emptive three-heart bid seems like an underbid with a working 7-count. I also feel that the raise to two hearts is too little and a jump to four hearts too much. Many players play a jump cue-bid of three diamonds here as a mixed raise: four- or five-card support and about 7 to 9 HCP. If this is available, it is the perfect description.

Your result so far:

A: 1♣: My answer might be unpopular here, but I would strongly disagree with an opening bid of two no-trump. With hearts wide open and more than enough values to open one club and reverse into two diamonds, I'd much rather treat this hand as suit-oriented, not balanced, and open one club. There is time enough to get back to no-trump later.

Your result so far:

A: 4♠: Bidding with hands of this sort is not (nor should it be) an exact science. If I had to guess, I'd take a shot at four spades, no matter what the vulnerability. The idea is that the less space the opponents have to get together, the better. This action doesn't have to work, but there's no point in mentioning your clubs, is there?

Your result so far: