mfa1010

4♥. We have to push a little with good limit values in this sequence even opposite a possible 3rd hand opening. 4♣ is too much. The hand is not slammy and I have xx in their suit. I know that 4♣ in such sequences normally doesn't promise support, but as we could have single/void it shouldn't be bid on a balanced non-opener with 3card support. I don't need to 'establish a force' either, since I can just double 5♣ if they bid on.

I would assume 2N to be natural, since responder could so easily have that hand. I think my regular partner would agree, so I would not be nervous about using it at the table. There is a good case for 2N unusual but much less so when opener can choose from 1N/2♣ with both minors.

We play something similar: 1NT is both minors, equal or longer diamonds 2♣ is longer clubs.

Very close. I would probably bid 4♠ but maybe that is too timid. I expect exactly one nice filler card most likely for the last train 4♥.

I'm also an auto-doubler.

I'm between mrace and jlogic. I would characterize 3♥ as rare, but not very rare. I would try 4♦ now. That should show real fit while going through 3♣ is more like a probe for different strains.

Partner's hand was too strong for 2♥ imo.

Pass then 2♠ over partner's double if he had one.

Agree with clee. Certainly about the second auction where it seems unplayable to me not to have a natural 4♠ available when partner was under such pressure. In the first auction there is a good case for 4♠ cuebid, but I would still strongly prefer 4♠ natural (NF, but partner can still bid).

Doesn't seem sensible, because the teams only know which matches that count AFTER that stage is over. At that point they can't go back in time and change their line-ups. It is not fair if a pair needs to do a big catch-up in the playing requirements during the second stage, because they happened to have played the wrong teams during the first stage (regardless if on purpose or not).

... and Alfredo Versace has been spotted inside a gym. (Actually doing work-out ;)) Interesting thread. I think not only the # of boards is important but also the fact that the opposition is tough all the way. Being able to play 60 boards against blue hair is not the same as being able to play 60 boars against national teams. Or 40 or whatever number. Takes practice. I don't think healthy food is so important during the relatively short time of the tournament. Radically changing ones eating habbits might be however. I tend to have a blood sugar problem and I try to be especially careful about my breakfast. Switching from my usual dark rye bread to bacon & egg & sausages etc. will really destroy me for instance. :) And then there is the alcohol issue. Great to get a pint in the bar after the play, love it. But worse for the stamina the next day and in the long run than what I am usually able to admit.

Yes, I agree with your logic if you play king ask after exclusion. I never did. Maybe it makes good sense to do so but the situations tend to different after exclusion vs RKC. After exclusion I expect the asker to be a captain with a plan (after RKC 5N is more like a general try). Therefore asker in my methods can just bypass a suit if he needs a king there, and teller will know to head for 7. I feel that going through the motion first of having a bid asking for kings is robbing valuable space in an often cramped sequence, but maybe that is wrong. I don't see why 5♦-5♠-5N-6♦ should show the club queen rather than the heart queen. And what would you do with no extra card to show but still with the ♠Q? That would be a 6♦ bid for me (except that I play worst-first here in my primary partnership, so I would actually bid 6♠ where 6♦ would be ♠Q + ♣K as in your logic above).

Partner has shown 6 spades from his failure to ask for the ♠Q. What hands could he have in the system with 6♠ that starts with 2♣? Maybe it is a smolen type of hand. I think I'm expected to assume that 5♦ includes a control in all suits when he seeks my opinion now, so he should have the ♥K. 6♣ should show the king. ♠AKxxxx, ♥Kxxx, -, ♣AKx? ♠AKxxxx, ♥Kxxxx, -, ♣AK? ♠AKxxxx, ♥Kxxx, -, ♣AKQ? ♠AKxxxx, ♥KQxx, -, ♣AKx? I don't know how convincing these examples are. I try 6♦ and give up after 6♥. Whatever he has he should have a strong try for 7 for his bidding.

I'm not a big fan of such reasonings. What if I have 6♣+4♥? What if my hand is otherwise unsuitable for a 3♣-opening, like with an outside A and an outside K? Or seven small with two aces? The argument just doesn't hold imo. One could still define 3♣ now as promising something in diamonds but it will mean that there exists a bunch of hands with just clubs that can't bid the second time around either.

3♦. ♣J962 is not a suit I wish to hint by doubling. I'm about ♥T short of 2NT. Pass could be a winner if they are about to play in a misfit, but usually it won't be.

Well done east if he was able to win the queen trick 1 from QTxxx. How should he work that out when p leads a middle-ish spot card.

The bidding is revealing enough so that west should not have been worried that his partner only had 2 spades. I don't see west winning the second spade with ♦x. He can't see through the cards and there would be a good chance that east could have a diamond stop with ♦A or ♦QJx. I don't see him win the second spade with ♦Qxx either since in practice it clearly increases his risk of being finessed in diamonds. Ergo I don't know who to finesse, so I'll play for the drop. I think it is most likely that west has ♦Qx. He might have given up or tried to a avoid a spade endplay.

:P I was just dreaming, Andy. :) 10:35am local time on a holy Saturday, I think I should be excused.

I normally strongly prefer late starting times. But when travelling to the US there is the jet lag thing which tends to get to me. Particularly I remember struggling badly in the late sessions in Toronto. Finishing midnight is like 6 or 7 in the morning. So maybe 10/3 will be just fine in Philly. Perhaps they even switched times with EBL so Europe now will be doing the late sessions instead of ACBL? THAT would really be awesome.

Back in the 2000 Junior Europeans a team mate thought he saw a 1♠ opening on his right and overcalled 2♣. Unfortunately for him (us) the real opening was 1NT, so his 2♣ was systemically for the majors. Partner was hit with a huge spade fit and chose to jump all the way to 6♠! That was not cheap- I don't recall having done such things myself, but I have surely made my share of other kinds of technical mistakes. Edited.

Open: 1. Italy 2. Monaco 3. Netherlands 4. Sweden 5. Poland 6. Denmark Women: 1. France 2. Sweden 3. England 4. Netherlands 5. Norway 6. Denmark Seniors: 1. England 2. Italy 3. Poland 4. Germany 5. Denmark 6. France

Ok I see it was in the OP.

Same here. I see the diagram above, but how did the play go?

I know Bård and Henrik. Very nice guys from Norway but a little crazy :) Say hi from me. They used to come to the Copenhagen Bridge Festival every august where they fit in nicely with the local expert crowd.

I would assume both passes to be forcing. If anything responder can pass 2♣ since he can see himself how strong he is. If you don't like forcing passes then double should be takeout from both hands. Otherwise we'll risk selling to a good 8-9 card fit at the 2-level. If they bid to the 3-level then I would assume the force is off. It is the usual principle after strength showing doubles/redoubles that we can sell if they jump and doubles are now takeout instead of penalty.