Leaderboard

One of the best at the table reactions I've seen - My partner and I bid to a fairly normal contract, and LHO leads face down, asking his parter whether she had any questions. RHO immediately says "No, go ahead and lead that 8 of hearts". LHO then faces the 8 of hearts, and partner sits there in stunned silence for 2 minutes before asking all sorts of questions. It turns out that this couple has a variation of asking whether his partner had any questions that they only use when they lead the 8 of hearts, letting them mess with declarer's mind (in a well intentioned way, of course).

But then that wouldn't really be respect since they gave away the position and you are guessing the queen solely based on their defense in what would otherwise have been a guess. You are really just trying to guess in what way their play was exploitable. Yes we can go infinite levels up, but most likely they just made an error, they were not thinking deeply at all whether they had xx, xxx, Qxx, or Qx of hearts, and now we get a chance to maximize our probability to make a game based on the count we have plus the squeeze. It is extremely rare in bridge that people are going as deep as you are playing them to go for.

+1

There are different views of democracy. There is the "populist model" where politicians exist to represent the views of their constituents, the "representative" model, where we elect people somewhat like us but they are expected to make their own decisions on important matters - ie delegation of decision making, and finally there is the "collectivist" model where everyone is expected to vote in the best interests of the country, rather than their own, but this basically boils down to the representative model in practice. It has been an interesting piece of political history in Britain to watch the zeitgeist move from collective to individualist/populist. I mean, the idea that people shouldn't vote in their own best interests has become almost unknown. Look at how the affluent people who say raise taxes are called hypocrites. Its bizarre. In general technocrats to not make good leaders as its rare to find someone who becomes an expert in a narrow field while keeping a good idea of the big picture. Good leaders tend to be generalists who can apply different frameworks to different puzzles. However, when you have a crisis that essentially relates to a single issue, a technocrat might be useful. I basically think the ECB is pursuing self destructive policies though, so the people it is getting elected are just going to do more of the same. The EU running roughshod over the voters is all going to end in tears. One way or another. I have to admit, I used to be quite pro europe but have become more sceptical by the year.

I also think that being the best posters are not necessarily the best bridge players. For example, I'm probably the only poster here that would beat JLOGIC in a long match, but his writing is much better.

The suggestion is to use 1NT - 2H; 2S - 2NT as an invite interested in 3NT or 4S (power invite) and 1NT - 2C; 2H - 2S as an invite interested only in 4S (shape invite).

Is this the face that launched a thousand ships? --- Goethe Was it worth it? Was it worth it? ---- Jim Croce Probably no one will value this contribution to the thread, but the price is right.

Posting to say I've had this come up in real life. Partner leads a spot, dummy comes down with KJTxx in the suit, and I'm holding Q87xx. Declarer called for the J, and thanks to seeing this problem, I knew to kick myself right as I played the Q. Hopefully next time kick myself before playing for the trick :)

Here's how I would solve that: me and pard had a special bid after strong 1♣ auctions which was 4♦. It basically meant "Pard, I have no clue what's going on! Please tell me what's the fit." You just skip this step and there you have it :)

Pass, 5H if partner doubles. What the farmer doesn't know, the farmer doesn't eat.

AKQxx - T9 you shd finesse Also it depends on what your goal is, for example AKQTxx - x If u need only 5 tricks in this suit, finesse is better, if u need 6 tricks cashing is better. Same goes for AKQTx vs xx if u need 5 cash, if need 4 cash and then finesse.

This is just from last week. Declarer claimed the rest of the tricks, but had miscounted and was a trick short. There were, however, two finesses available. The defenders knew that both finesses were working (and there was no unsuccessful squeeze line). Quick as a flash, one of the defenders saw the only successful option and made the following offer: "You can choose which finesse to take, but if you choose correctly you have to buy me a glass of wine at the end".

Give them to me.

BBO forum, I'm sure this topic has come up here many times but I've not seen it. Playing at a 299er game today I pointed out to our opponents that if they play a short club opening (2 or less clubs) it is colored blue on the convention card indicating it should be announced. They said they don't bother because there's no penalty for not announcing it. Is this correct? jerryd

4NT. Partner didn't have to start cue bidding (he could have raised to 4[hearrts] with a bad hand) and I want to make bidding 7♥ easy. (I'll bid it opposite the 3 key cards playing partner for the Spade or Diamond Queen). I can't imagine that 6♥ isn't good if partner has his bidding (ie the cue bid of 3♠).

And what about when you hold a void in the opposite Major. Or perhaps one wishes to split the HCP of the various splintrs (using 3OM to show a 13-15 HCP splinter and the direct 4 level to show a 10-12 splinter). Whatever methods you choose are always a compromise - but I think this discussion is valid whatever methods one uses. For example: your auction on the first case would go 1S-3H (unspecified splinter) 3S ask, 4H showing a Heart splinter. 5D cue bid. Or maybe you'll tell me that 3NT is used for the Heart splinter since that saves room ... what about the auction: 1H - 3S (unspecified splinter) 3NT- 4D (diamond splinter) 5C Now this auction is the same as Andy's simplified 5 level auction and your system isn't unambiguous. Sorry for the long, slightly off topic reply, but I don't think that conventions have a place in a discussion about bidding system principles. (People's conventions are interesting, and I in fact agree with using somthing similar to your idea but I don't think this thread is the place for it).

Case 1: (Last train at the 5 level) I can't imagine not bidding slam when I have the club control. So I'm not sure that 5H is last train. I think it's 1st round heart and 1st round club looking for 7S. (6C would be first round club, but not first round heart) and 6H I guess would be the same as 5H ... so maybe 5H is last train after all - I just can't imagine needing it. Case 2: (Last train at the 4 level) I play that the last train cue bid promises the denied control, but says nothing about the suit bid. (so in your example the 4H cue bid would show cllub control and not say anything about hearts). I think 5C should show Heart and Club control - but a hand that isn't sure about slam (eg lots of Controls but no tricks). Case 3: I don't think 4D is a cue bid! It's natural slam try. 4H would thus promise heart control. (In this auction you can make slam tries with a source of tricks - bid the suit or with Heart Control - bid 4H). Case 4: Expert standard depends on who you ask. Best if you ask your partner. If we'd agreed last train and case 2 came up I'd bid last train with the missing control (unsure if I was promising Heart control) - but partner should also be UNSURE whether it promises Heart control and only know it promised the missing control and would have to bid with this uncertaintity