Leaderboard

I was once a smoker. I look back on that, and I simply cannot explain it. There are other things of that sort. Women once could not vote? People with black skin had to sit in the back of the bus? Were we nuts? I think there will come a time when we look back at letting people buy armor piercing weaponry and ask "What were we thinking?" Once we get our heads out of our butts, I imagine we can resolve the various issues sensibly.

Inverted Minor Suit Raises according to my source are not part of 2/1. Yet they would certainly appear to be superior to standard treatments. So why not just make them standard, or is my source hopelessly outdated? If so, does anyone have the title of a good up to date book on 2/1 incorporating all the latest recommended bidding sequences? Shep’s website has a nice treatment for Inverted Minor Suit Raises. It can be found here.

Google "Responsible for the overall management/coordination of all aspects of company business at a location including production, sales, technical support, customer service, human resources, safety and administrative activities; plans and directs these functions in order to meet operational and financial goals for the location" and it's readily apparent that this is taken from a template. It was pretty clearly written to be entirely generic.

Mostly I just wish you the best with your move. As to when people started having trouble communicating, I note that when I took my first "professional" job (doing mathematics instead of moving furniture) in 1960, I was there for at least a month before I realized that they thought I was there permanently and I was planning on starting grad school in the fall. Sometimes these people just talk funny. I recall once during a hiring process we had to fill out forms to show that our actions were sufficiently affirmative. In one column we had to list the "minorities" we had interviewed. In another column we had to list the "other minorities" we had interviewed. Another time we all were told we had to sign some sort of document about drug usage. I have never even smoked mj but the wording was so incomprehensible and generally awful that I felt I couldn't sign it. Others felt the same way so eventually there was a compromise agreement that we would sign something saying that we had read it. But the one I really wish I had kept a copy of was the loyalty oath I signed in 1967. Of course I had to say I wasn't a communist, but mostly I was committing myself to defend the State of Maryland if it was attacked by surrounding states. "Repel the Northern scum" is in our state song, or at least it used to be, My more liberal friend simply can't recall signing such a document but I imagine they did. If Pennsylvania attacks, I am ready! I really have no idea who makes this stuff up. In my semi-retirement years I can afford to say that I am not working for anyone that puts this sort of crap in writing, but there was a time when I needed to just look the other way and sign.. Maybe you could compromise and accept a job on the condition that you never have to work with whoever wrote the document. Anyway, back to the main point. Best wishes, may you choose well. Ken

Perhaps we should update the 2nd Amendment to read:

This happens about twice a year and is national headline news when it does, there was a case recently in the UK where a student from India was randomly shot in the street, the shooting AND the trial have had really heavy national media coverage. It just doesn't feel like it's that unusual in the states. As to Finland, I can see why they have serious levels of gun ownership, but what sort of guns ? I'm guessing mainly hunting weapons rather than automatic stuff.

No, but some of the people who hold guns for nefarious purposes will be getting searched for other reasons, if they know that being found with an illegal gun will get them in a heap more trouble than the other more mildly illegal stuff (petty drug dealing for example), they might dump the guns. You are never going to eliminate the gun rampages, you can however reduce how often and how deadly. Look at the UK, heavy gun control, how much gun crime do we have ? some gang related stuff in the inner cities, a few armed robberies and the odd wacko shooting rampage, most of the time our police don't need to carry guns. Different culture but it seems to work, the gun murder rates are vastly different to the US. There are guns in the UK, and you have to apply for a licence to hold them. No handguns, some shotguns/hunting rifles, no automatic weapons. Before you get a licence you have to prove you have secure storage and good mental health. This process takes some time.

Against 3♠, if they start with three rounds of hearts and West pitches a club, you have to draw two rounds of trumps exactly before playing clubs to avoid a club ruff. Then East wins the club and leads his last trump and you have no entry to dummy's long club so lose a diamond at the end for down one.

This strikes me as bad, not good. You have a limited amount of time to play two or three hands. I want to spend that time playing bridge, not waiting while the opponents have a 5-minute discussion about the possible percentages on a board, what Jenny led at table 6 and how 6NT could be made double-dummy. That debate is for after the event. It's bad enough when you can see all the other scores and the percentage, as on current bridgemates.

Regular partnerships are like marriage - you don't go up to people you are only casual friends with and ask them to marry you. Rather, you date different people with no expectations of staying with them, but when you find someone you like and are happy continuing to be with (and they feel the same), then you decide to get married. With bridge partnerships, you probably ask someone you know is a decent player to play one particular event with. You practice together for a few weeks beforehand, then play. If you both enjoyed the experience, then one of you will ask the other to play a different event later, and the other will say yes - thus beginning a partnership. There's also no rules (like marriage) that say you can't have more than one regular partner - most people I know have two or three regular partners, that they play different sorts of events with. So there's nothing wrong with asking someone you want to try playing with to play, say, the pairs section of an event if they are only entered in the teams section - maybe their teams partner can't play the pairs and they couldn't be bothered asking someone just for the pairs. But they would say yes if asked. If you don't mind playing solely online, I can probably find a couple of Australian youth players for you to try out. If you developed a good partnership, and you have a bit of money, you are welcome to come to Australia for Youth Week - an annual get-together for all of our youth players, a couple of kiwi ones and one or two internationals. It is ostensibly for selecting the Australian Youth Team, but mostly about drinking, partying, playing games and having an awesome time with people we only see a few times a year. It happens in late January in Canberra. This should be a drawcard for anyone in the Northern Hemisphere - January is our hottest month. The week after Youth Week is the Summer Festival of Bridge, our second-biggest national event. If you have some free time (i.e. you don't have a serious full-time job yet) you can also stick around for the Gold Coast Congress in late February - this is also a lot of fun, because you'll be staying near the beach and there are lots of parties every night of the event, and also good bridge, it is our biggest national event and it attracts many, many internationals.

When you say that 3♣ is preemptive, does that mean it is to play opposite an 18-19 NT? That's fine, but obviously quite infrequent. I suggest 3♣ is to play opposite a 12-14 NT but enough for game opposite an 18-19 NT, regardless of vul. Unbalanced hands can sort themselves out, they have a big fit hence some degree of safety.

I will check the book out :) As my contribution: all constructive FN biddings from vugraph in tree format (.bss) with alerts included which you can browse using BBO .bss viewer: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/86311885/fantunes.bss :)

[hv=pc=n&s=shdc&w=skq943ha9d8cakt95&n=shdc&e=sa87htdakjtcq7632]399|300[/hv] Bidding went(opps pass) W opens bidding is 2seat: 1♠-2♣(2+ 3way GF, deny 4♠ if balanced) -3♣(4+extras)-3♠-4♣-5♣-6♣ context is 2/1 with weak NT and sound 1M openings I had disagreement about this hand with my partner, and i would like to ask how you understand subsequent bids playing or not playing minorwood if that matters.

Reading all the posts, now i realized problem is more complex... 1. I dont think neboulous 2♣ made damage, even if it would promise 4, still responder may prefer to support ♠ with and marginal hand, creating same issues to what suit is actually agreed. 2. If responder take capitancy he will never get known about Q♠ or K♣, dependig on what suit will be agreed. 3. I dont think 3♦ by opener may be splinter, couse we cannot splinter into side suit w/o known support to this suit...maybe nebolous 2♣ isnt so great after all:) 4. I also dont think 4♣ after 3♠ may be minorwood, couse of same reasons as 3, although minorwood here would make grand easy to bid. 5. 3NT as sirious/non sirious, problem of suit agreement still exist, but even if not, i m not great fan of removal of jugment from chossing 3NT instead of 4M on 8card fit. 6. After reading everything i still dont see purpose in 3♠, i think that simple 4♣ as agreement of ♣ would lead to grand(unless opener have problems with counting to 13)

It may contain 4♠ only with hand with 5+♣, other hands with 4♠ go via Jacoby. I was sitting as W, my p said that he took 4♣ as minorwwod and 5♣ was mentioned answer (2A+Q). From my point of view the bid that made most of the damage was 3♠, i just see no point in setting weaker suit on slam going hand, and later 4♣ was intended as cue on "agreed" ♠, partner said he show me Hxx in ♠, imo w/o suit agreed first it cant be.

Can 4♣ be taken as minorwood if 2C not promise 3? And what you think about 4♣ insterad of 3S?

Not cuebidding over 4♣ is beyond me. Also I would have bid 3♦ over 2♣ splinter. Not sure if that was available.

I remain wondering why pass of the dble to 2S? I assumed this was imps and the colors mean little really. 6/4 = a good playing hand, for me you bid 4S over dble.

1: 3♥, certainly. 2: 1♥ - 2♦ 3♣ - 3♠ 3NT Sorry, I can't think of stopping this hand anywhere except 3NT. East's diamonds are not strong enough to pull it to 4♦. 3: I would lead a ♣. 4: Against a suit slam, I always lead an ace unless the bidding suggests a void in the suit. 5: X, then bid ♣.

In my system, adjusted to 2/1, goes 1♥ - 1♠ 2♥ (not enough to make a GF 3♥ rebid) - 3♦ (responder's new suit is still forcing) 3♥ (I have SOLID hearts!!!!! Please don't argue with me!) - 3NT (to play)

An Aceless 4-loser still merits a raise to game opposite a 9-10 loser raise.

I would invite with that hand, not jump to 4. If I have a short trial bid - then show ♦ single, if not 3♣. In the auction you posted it depends on vulnerability, but it seems now that both A♣ and A♥ ave are on side. I would probably still bid 3♣ over the first double in any case, but wether to punish them or not is totally up to how much is the -2x contract versus how much is our game. RHO has ♣ and ♥, LHO and partner has ♦ and my guess that partner holds at least 3-4 hearts. http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gifYu

Save a spot at that bar for me. I agree with you guys here, and to pick both of your guys' minds would be a hell of a way to end a day in my opinion! Did you mean that if you had a spot instead of the ♥9 you would lead a Spade? It's probably just a mistake, but at this point I'm too tired and not thinking too coherently.

Fortunately I had the back of a fag packet available and Gnashers line looks far better. You can reduce the problem to just considering trumps and clubs. This chance with your line is trumps 4-1 (W) or 3-2 (Q right) with clubs 4-3 ..about 8.5% + 21%. But the chance a la Gnasher is QxxC and trumps 3-2 or QxxxC and trumps 3-2 (Q right)... about 27% + 12%. Both lines have other chances. Note, once the QC didn't fall and the JS was finessed, the 4th club is ruffed high. The 4252 bit lost me, as the alternative line covers this (though I'd play for trumps 3-2)

The probability of bringing in the 7 card ♥ suit without a loser is about 52%. That's assuming partner is void. That's 36% for a 3-3 break plus the probability that you can drop the ♥ J doubleton in a 4-2 break. There are 15 possible combinations for the suit in a 4-2 break. 5 of those will include the J doubleton (i.e. J with each of the other other small cards). So the probability of J doubleton in a 4-2 break is 5/15 or 33%. The probability of a 4-2 break is approximately 48%. So dropping a J doubleton is 33%(48%) or 16 %. ------------------------------------------------------------ Ok, now to the auction. If the heart suit wasn't so solid, you might open 1 ♥ and over any repsonse bid 4 ♥. That's a good way to bid a freakish hand with opening values and a 7 card or longer broken major suit. But with the quality of the suit, it would seem better to open 1 ♥ and then either keep bidding ♥ at the minimum level 1 ♥ - 1 ♠ 2 ♥ - 3 ♦ 3 ♥ - 3 NT 4 ♥ or take a rosier view -- upgrading the ♠ K after the 1 ♠ response and looking at only 6 losers make a jump rebid in ♥ 1 ♥ - 1 ♠ 3 ♥ - 4 ♦ 4 ♥ - ? ? - probably getting to a slam 6 ♥ BTW although NT might just score better at MPs, the hand is probably better off in ♥s. There's no guarantee that you'll be able to get to the ♥ suit and you may need 2 entries if ♥s don't break. Conversely, responder's stoppers and high cards are working at a ♥ contract.

I can't do much better than 1H-1S-3H-6NT (perhaps with some ace asking in there somewhere). It doesn't help that I recently agreed with my partner that 4y after 1x-?-3x is a cuebid for x. ahydra

I'm sure it's been written before, but much of the reason that ace leads seem to work so well double dummy is that you always get to switch to the right suit at trick 2, which is by no means guaranteed single-dummy. I'd lead the ♣J on this hand.

Looks like we're reading "Winning Notrump Leads" by Bird & Anthias. Lots of sim hands document the major suit bias for the 1N-3N auction. ♠A lead works when holding supporting honor. Suspect ♥9 would be the winner on this hand, but likely not by much. Good point that partner's pass reduces bias toward Major Suit lead from shortness. However our HCP suggest partner had nothing to say even with a 6-card major. No hand in the book is a close match, but the authors generalize: "When comparing two major suit leads (or minor suit leads), it is usually better to lead from two low or three low rather than low from 4 cards headed by one or two honors. Leads from a major suit doubleton fare surprisingly well because partner is likely ot hold at least 5 cards opposite." Some useful expectations tables: West Suit Length: 1--------2--------3-------4-------5-------6 East Length ♥/♠: 5.4-----4.7-----4.0-----3.3-----2.6-----2.0 East Length ♣/♦: 3.8-----3.3-----2.9-----2.4-----2.0-----1.6

I'm assuming this is IMPs, though I probably wouldn't change my answer even at MPs. I lead a low Spade, because partner can easily have two Queens and length in our suit, and otherwise we likely aren't setting them.

I've seen a number of posts criticizing Max Hardy's methods, so I'm not too keen on getting his book on 2/1. Anyone have a suggestion on a modern up to date book on 2/1?

I added inverted minors when I was learning, considering them sophisticated and advanced. After time, though, I removed them, and they are currently one of my three or four least favorite conventions. When partner opens 1♣ or 1♦ (in a non-club system), being forced to bid 1nt with an average 8 count and 5 in partner's suit is worse than perverse, usually wrongsiding the NT in addition to being wildly misdiscreptive. I need a simple raise when I have a hand worth a simple raise (and partner being able to re-raise directly to 3m when short in the M's wins too). I think a system must have a way to preemptively raise, make a simply raise, a way to invitationally raise, and a way to make a forcing raise for each suit if in a non-competitive auction. A very simple solution is to get rid of weak jump shifts (another convention I do not wish to play), and use some of your formerly weak 2 level responses for your forcing minor raises. I use 2♦ for my club raise, and 2♠ for my diamond raise (using 2♥ for the non-inv. 5♠ 4-5♥ hands that are awkward otherwise).