Leaderboard

If we accept the bidding through 4♠ then it seems much simpler for responder to just bid blackwood over that since he knows his partner doesn't have the heart ace.

As josh says, once partner bypasses hert cuebid blackwood makes this very easy. The most important thing is that 3♦ must promise 4 card support.

Yeh, I would bet at least 5% of the time a person logs on to these fora so they can discuss the technical BBO stuff. Definitely make it quicker for them to find it without being bothered by Bridge, while annoying the rest of us.

II can never remember exactly what the very subtle differences between Ingberman and the more modern (and, I think, twice modified and now including some of Ingberman's original method) "Lebensohl over reverses" are. So I'll let the rest of you argue over the details, if you like.

Yes it's forcing because 3C is GF.

When partner opens a strong no trump out of turn, you know that he is going to correct it to 3NT exactly 100% of the time. If I had a balanced 3-count, I would be this annoyed - :angry: :angry: :angry:. With a balanced 13, on which I would have simply raised to 3NT, much less so B-) .

I don't think that you have read a word of what Andy wrote above. Andy probably does not know what people in Kansas and New South Wales want, but he is neither speculating nor guessing, as you are. I will go out on a limb ans say that the people in Kansas and New South Wales do not give two hoots that the people in the other location are playing under different regulations from them. I honestly think that your "many" above is actually none. I just do not understand why you would want to change the regulations in these places or in Cape Town or Buenos Aires. Do you play in these places frequently enough for it to matter to you? If not, do you think that maybe they should be trusted to know what they want? Obviously you want World Government too. Should that be Sharia Law or Communist Dictatorship? Or should it be what you prefer and are used to...?

No UI, pointing out an irregularity doesn't suggest anything about your hand. Many/most people would point it out without even thinking about what they hold. I'm surprised to see anyone feels differently. Btw it's also been my experience that when holding a strong notrump or better and partner is barred, the player always opens 3NT anyway. I don't recall ever seeing anyone do otherwise.

If one were to accept that the comment provided UI demonstrably suggesting bidding 3NT (which I do not), I think a poll of players who were asked what they would call if they knew that their partner was barred, but not for what reason, would find that pass is not a logical alternative.

East should be shot. He rightfully painted them into a corner by not accepting the 1nt bid forcing them to guess and then waits for the final result to protest that they guessed right. Is this not a triple shot? I once had the nearly identical auction but I opened 2nt in 3rd chair. After my lho barred my pard it went p - p - and I bid 3nt into his balan ced 19 count.

Does "Pay attention, partner, I'm dealer" carry any other information than the wish to draw attention to the irregularity and the discontent with the fact that the partner did not pay attention? I would say, it doesn't. Therefore, North is not restricted and did chose a lucky call. Karl

Results stands. South's remark does not imply anything in particular. East would say the same thing no matter what south held.

In have been participating in BBO (Free) Tournaments and I have a problem with the time allowed to play (I think 30 seconds for each trick) mostly after bidding and before playing the first card from my hand because that is the moment where normally we need a bit more time to think, look at the dummy and make a plan. Sometimes the time allowed is enough but other times (mainly when you are the declarer) it isn't and soon you start getting warnings that you'll be replaced in x seconds for a Robot and that makes you nervous and causes precipitation and probable mistakes! Thus, my suggestion to the BBO sofware programmers (Forum BBO "Suggestions for the Software") was to ask them to find a way/solution that allows a bit more time (say 45 seconds instead of 30 seconds) before playing the first card of the first trick. That would be more wise in my view and certainly the BBO tournament players would appreciate if they are informed and aware that there is a bit more time (I think more 15 seconds than the normal 30 seconds allowed for the rest of the tricks would suffise) for the play of the first card of the first trick to allow for the hand planning. To the readers of this topic, please espress if you agree (or desagree) with my request. Thank you all,

One really great feature they had at Swan Games was a button you could click at any time during the hand, "stand up automatically before another hand is dealt" - rather than waiting until new cards were dealt / deciding whether to stay or go according to how good your hand was / leaving your opps sitting there staring at a hand their new opp may need redealt. This would also make it easier for people to avoid being 'unintentional runners' - and make me a lot happier about seeing some vigorous enforcement against the frequent runners.

It seems to me that an easy solution is available.