Leaderboard

Reminds me of the 2007 world mixed pairs scandal in Turkey, where the field for the final was enlarged after the result from the semi final had been posted. Aside from the very dubious procedure I agree that 16 qualifying teams was much more reasonable in this Transnationals.

3♣ forcing, you know you're bidding 6♥, if you are worried about them bidding 6S, this seems the most likely way to stop them. West might put his parter with ♠ & ♦ instead of the blacks and not take the save.

Two decisions that worked out poorly for me in a match last night (teams of 6, IMPed): 1) [hv=pc=n&s=sqjh76542dkqj74c2]133|100|Favourable, dealer S.[/hv] You play 3 weak 2s (with the formal agreement that they need only contain 5 cards in this position) What's your call? 2) Which if any of the calls by S do you disagree with on the hand below? You formally play light openings in this position (as weak as about 7 if the suit is headed by AK and looks like a lead you want), and 14-16 NT. [hv=pc=n&s=skq5h54d64cakj954&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1nd(either%20minors%20or%20majors)p2d(better%20minor)p2h(both%20majors%2C%205-4%20or%20better%2C%20not%20specifying%20better%20major)p2s(preference)ppp]133|200[/hv]

[hv=pc=n&s=sh765432dkqjt742c&d=w&v=0&b=8&a=p1h(4+%20card%20suit)2h(Spades%20%26%20a%20minor)]133|200[/hv] Cue bidding opps known suit (ie 2S) would invitational or better in pard's suit. 3S and 4C would be splinter. But maybe these aren't good (high) enough!

My link Not sure if I messed up or GIB did. When North bids 4♠ I figure we have a play for slam if partner has a ♥ control. I assume this isn't a good hand for Blackwood because I'm okay with missing a control in ♦ but not in ♥. I start a cue bidding sequence with 5♣, GIB shows the A♦, and then I'm stuck. A bid of 5♥ would incorrectly show the ace, and any other bid besides 5♠ takes me beyond the highest level where I'm safe without knowing we have a ♥ control. So I bid 5♠ with the thought that partner will continue the bidding when holding a ♥ control because at this point that's the only thing we could be missing, and there's no reason I would have initiated a cue bidding sequence if I was going to play in 5♠ with controls in all the side suits. As you see, GIB passed and I missed an easy slam. Is there some other way I could have bid this to find out if we had a ♥ control? Should I have just taken the risk of a 6♠ bid without knowing I had a ♥ control, as some others did?

My hand: ♠Qxx ♥Qxxx ♦xx ♣Kxxx The bidding: 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ - ??? I understand that opener has not limited his hand, so it's still possible we have enough combined strength for game. But is opener's rebid a forcing bid? I've had good luck passing in situations like this, where the bidding indicates a misfit that would probably play poorly in game even if opener has extra strength. Yet I've also sat at a table where one of my opponents blew his top when his partner passed in this situation. Is a pass permitted? If so is it unwise?

I wasn't sure how to play this suit. Naturally my line was not the winning one: J98 opposite Kxxx in a NT contract with enough entries to play it however you like. What's the best line to make two tricks in the suit? Does it change things if you can't afford to lose two tricks both to LHO in the process?

I think the East hand is far too good for 2S. I'd bid 3H with that and if it went 4H p p back to me I'd bid 4S. As for the West hand, I'm not sure what you think he is meant to do over 3H - his hand is too good to pass and doesn't really have a clear bid either so I'd probably have doubled too (assuming it isn't pure penalties but rather just a good hand with no other action). I hate his second double - I think he should be bidding 4S now.

When I played natural system where this kind of sequence matters, I also played 1S (and 1C - 1D - 1H) absolutely forcing. I used the jumps for 56 GF hands, although it might be better to use them for weak 56 hands, not sure. I actually once saw that kind of jump bid during two years. For much more frequent use I'd use them as some sort of raise for major, ie any minisplinter or something. I just wanted to handle those 56 hands somehow because your 1-1-1 rebid is very loaded anyways. I also never included 18-19NT in the rebid at the one lvl, I don't want yet again another hand type in that one bid. There is no problem checking back for 4 card S after 2NT, I don't quite get you there mck4711. Of course you get some occasional losses from partner passing 2NT when you might have had better S game you'd reach after 1S.

Did u ask pd why did not he bid 3 or 4 ♥ after DBL and cued with only 1 keycard vs a pd who is coming from pass and responded 1NT showing some ♠ values ? Don't go hard on yourself, 5♥ if intended to ask ♠ control is not a bad bid. To figure if he has xx AKQJxxx KQx A or x AKQxxxx KQx Ax imo. I would bid 5♥ too, i wld never think pd is lack of keycards for his bid.

I asked, but the answer was basically 'undiscussed'. The better minor bid was taken to be semi forced.

1) Pass 2) Not surprised that this decision did not work. I would not have opened 1NT I would have bid 3♣ over 2♠. East's better minor seems to be ♦ and West does not have minors. Of course 3♣ is risky, but indications are that you will find some ♣ and some values in dummy. It would be useful to know more about opponents methods, e.g. what a direct 2♠ over the 2♣ bid would have meant. If this is still pass or correct, indications are that East does not want to get to the 3 level with his minor suit holding. Rainer Herrmann

I trust partner. He should have a huge hand. The only question is how to continue. I have already showed values in ♠, but K♣/ A♦ - IMO - are of more importance to p. I would skip 4♠, but CB on level 5: 5♣ or 5♦, depending on agreement (1st-round, mixed). P is short in ♠, meaning there is no risk that opps can take 2 quick-tricks in ♠.

Unless coincidentally, 2♠ is not a suit in this auction.

4H in this Stayman auction should not exist. As for RKC, 4C! = RKC agreeing Sp ( Baze ) -- or 4D! = RKC ( modified Baze ). 3H! = ( other major ) splinter somewhere ... next step asks ... you can even show a void . 3C/3D = no Sp fit ( have 4h ), natural 4+ card minor, slammish 4NT = Quant, no Sp fit EDIT: 4D! ( Baze ) = fit, balanced, slam invitation -- or 4C! = fit, RCK ( modified Baze ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The only thing I can think of is 4H as natural, 6 cards Hts / 4 cards Sp. But why would you NOT want to play in the 4-4 Sp fit ??

Bermuda bowl ( 10/25/2011 ) board # 2 11 IMP swing West Declarer in 4H ... making on repeated Ht leads by North. Yet, in the other room it was set starting with a non-trump lead. Can it always be made on a non-trump lead by North ? ( Declarer seems to be limited entries to hand for repeated deep-trump-finesses and Cl lead(s) not to mention handling the 4-1 Diam break). Twice: One pair made.... while their team mates set in the other room -- an 11 IMP swing. ---USA2 vs USA1 ---Netherlands vs Italy [hv=pc=n&s=s98764h4d52c98532&w=sajt5ht872dk86c64&n=skq2haq53djt94cat&e=s3hkj96daq73ckqj7]399|300[/hv]

Partner bid a huge hand at 2♠, and I was content to play just game. Now he just showed something like -:6:4:3, and the lead is going to be through my black kings... my hand became worse during the bidding, it is far from maximum 1NT. I would still be content to play just game.http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif

[hv=pc=n&s=sak6hk92dq94ca832&w=sjt8543ht87dkj65c&n=s2haj653da32ct654&e=sq97hq4dt87ckqj97]399|300[/hv] South is declarer in 4♥. Play or Defend :)

Started with the onsite commentary due to problems the BBO commentators were having at the start and then switched to the BBO commentators when the onsite audio started to get a bit jumpy. Went for the larger video on this one too. Enjoy!

What I'm getting from this (and further comments are certainly welcome) is that although the one-level rebid is not technically forcing, it's rarely a good idea to pass (assuming you weren't stretching to make a one-over-one to begin with), and my favorable results from passing in auctions like this may well be an aberration.

[hv=pc=n&w=s7hajt8d432ca9764&n=s432h432daqj85ck2&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1sp2dp3sppp]266|200|MATCHPOINTS[/hv] Playing at the club against weaker players, you get this rather unusual auction! You lead the A♣, partner and declarer contributing the lowest outstanding ♣. What do play at trick 2? Would it change if declarer had bid only 2♠?

In my partnership 1♠ is not forcing at all and I too have had good results by passing it. However, I always had something like 2 little in the unbid suit and the ♣ K here would have me bidding 1nt.

The 2♠ bid shows a good hand not a rock crusher, 3♠ shows that. I pass, over to pard and believe strongly that this kind of decision belongs to pass out seat. ie. Pard can double and then I will bid.

Yes, this is the auction. When I played this hand, those who went on to bid 1NT went down after partner bid them to a higher level, while 1♠ made with an overtrick for a nice score, so pass worked out best. But I'm less concerned with this particular hand than with the general question: is 1♠ forcing in this situation? Almost forcing? Or not forcing at all?

I do not understand this comment. Starting ♣ from dummy is not fatal. The idea of ruffing the ♣ loser high in hand looks sound to me. Rainer Herrmann

Let's see. This is a forum question. OP says it is too late for correction, but we are told not to necessarily believe him. We are given that both cc's explain the bid the same way the player explained it, but we are told this isn't good enough to answer a forum question on "simple rulings". If we are never to rely on the evidence as presented, we should never offer an opinion on what the ruling should be.

That's Dr. Csaba to you!

It's kinda sad that people have to resort to creating multis just to downvote other people and/or upvote themselves. A game I used to play called GXC had a problem with multis, and while they won't admit it, it played a major role in killing the website. While I don't think it will ever reach that point of widespread anarchy, a few users will be inconvenienced by people attacking them. To make a counterargument, at least the admins here are more proactive and will actively ban. Because of this flame war, I had an idea. Hopefully before uday and Rain collaborate and decide against the downvoting, I will create a thread where I ask for 3 different things and see what happens, in the nature of an experiment. The results might prove useful, as I don't think I have any enemies or admirers (at least I know I don't have any admirers on here). EDIT - I wanted to give an upvote to uday, but apparently you can't vote for admins' posts. What up with that?