Gerben47

I like methods based on "Preempts from A to Z". Current favorite method: Responses to 2♥: 2♠: Asks for singleton 2NT: 5+♠ 3♣: Ogust Responses to 2♠: 2NT: Asks for singleton 3♣: Ogust A hand that wants to bid ♣ naturally after a weak two doesn't seem to come up anyway. As I cannot remember responding 3♦ to 2M either so maybe 3♦ should mean: Tell me which minor you have stopped, if any.

With a passed hand: play a Woolsey double: Dbl = 4-card major + 5+card minor Responses 2♣ = pass or bid 2♦ 2♦ = bid your major 2M = 6-card suit

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sxxxxhxxxdxxxcxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Auction so far: LHO: 1NT (10-12) Partner: Dbl (15+ any) RHO: Pass (forces redouble; 1-suited or strong)

Bid until you are declarer is the usual advice with such a hand. Anyway, loser count tells me I have about 3.5 losers. No I'm not going to open 2♣! 1) If partner opens 1♦ I bid 1♥. If partner opens 1♠ I bid 2♥. 2) If RHO opens 1♦ I bid 1♥. If RHO opens 1♠ I bid 2♥. Followup: some amount of clubs, if needed followed up by more hearts. 3) 1♥ then 5♣ on my next turnl. As to the hand: After 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠, bid 3♣ showing GF and 5-5. Partner bids 3NT and now I bid 4♥. I don't know how to reach 6♥ on these cards. The ♣J is very important.

I responded 'GF or invitational with both majors'. With one partner I agreed that the simple cuebid of a minor is an unconditional game force and the jump cuebid is invitational with at least 4-4 in majors. The repeated cuebid asks for a stopper for 3NT.

The problem with the "one under game" bids is that they are only right if they are exactly right. If we play 3♠ and make 10 tricks game would have been better and if we make only 8 tricks we were too high. Q: is passout plus for those sitting in 1st and 3rd or those sitting in 2nd and 4th?

So what question is it you are answering? Is it: "If I add the Zar points of the hands and select a contract, the contract will make" ? I'm very interested in these results, if you could send me the files I'd be very grateful. Email: gerben AT t-online DOT de To save time you might want to use the deals from the GIB Double Dummy library (see the GIB research page). Gerben

The standard standard meaning is 5+♠, the usual agreement for top pairs is 4+♠. The standard 'mad scientist' meaning is: Dbl = 4+♠ 1♠ = Unsuitable for 1NT and no 4♠

After 1♣ - 1M you can use 3♦ as forcing raise, after 1♦ - 1M you might want to agree that if you have 18-20 balanced you ALWAYS open 1♣ and now 2NT is your forcing raise.

1♦ - 1♥ (natural or GF) Just bid natural! 1♠ = 4♠ 1N = balanced no 4M, i.e 33(43), (32)44 or 22(54) or 5m332 2♣ = minors 2♦ = 6+♦ 2♥ = 4♥ Now after 1♦ - 1♥ - 2♥ Now the next bid (2♠) asks for a singleton, 3m is natural and game forcing. Responses to 2♠: 2NT = NO singleton 3♣ = ♣ singleton 3♦ = ♦ singleton 3♥ = ♠ singleton You still have 2NT left as general game try, after which partner may sign off or bid "values" in a minor. If you have a game try there is no need to tell partner if you have 4 or 5 hearts. You need to know what HE has. If you have 3-card support for partner and GF you can also use one of the tools above and then decide if 4♥ is a good idea or not.

1x X XX = 10+ and at least two 4-card suits other than x. If partner can hit x and the 4th suit, they have a problem. If not, my hand is well defined.

That was my idea as well. RHO ruffs the ♣K and returns a ♦. :) Now what?

I agree, it looks like a factor of 4 or 5 or so.

We had a nice success once when my opponent doubled a cue bid and my partner bid the slam in a split second. The guy who doubled was on lead, though, and did no longer feel like leading the suit, which was what my partner was counting on :)

So does someone say: "All bids over 3NT were alertable", because they usually are. Or is Blackwood not alertable? And cuebids? Etc.

Agree with this, this was my point exactly. People rather discuss conventions instead of style questions, but they are so important.

It's a natural bid and therefore not a convention. I guess without discussion it would be forcing, but that's why I ike to discuss things.

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sjt2hk7da98743c96&s=saq543ha863dcakt4]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] After reaching 4♠ without opposition (pass pass 1♠ pass 3♣* pass 4♠), West leads the ♥Q. Now what?

A good treatment is Dutch Doubleton. In this system 1C can be 2 cards and includes ANY 18-20 balanced and weak NT hands with 4432 exactly. See for example this convention card: http://www.xs4all.nl/~riewald/pdf/systeemk...b-Paulissen.pdf

You are! So far I understand all of this, AM is between 0:00 and 12:00, and PM is between 12:00 and 24:00. What confuses me the most is that 12:40 PM is earlier in the day than 11:40 PM! No wonder people make mistakes with this! To comfort Roland, I have never seen 24:06 either. Although when I did not sleep at all during the night I sometimes refer to noon as 36:00 :D If you want metric time you'd have to change the whole clock because there are now 86400 seconds in a day, and metric time would prefer 100000 seconds in a day. Now that would mean a new second is 0.864 old seconds, one minute is 100 seconds and one hour is 10000 seconds. People would also invent a name for 1000 seconds as this is a good precision for making an appointment with someone. Perhaps a quarter as it is almost a quarter of a traditional hour. "See you at 56 quarters" would then mean 5:60:00. Oh well, one can dream. I guess this proposal has no chance, it will be discarded for being too sensible.

10 - 12 causes a lot of problems, but 1st 2nd NV I like 11 - 13. Our notrump ladder looks like this: 11 - 13 open 1NT 14 - 16 rebid 1NT 17 - 18 rebid 2NT (this is not forcing) 19 - 20 2♣ then 2NT 21 - 22+ open 2NT After this we still have 2♣ then 3NT and 2D then 3NT as stronger options. This is more a statement of strength than real HCP ranges. In other seats and colours: 1NT = 14-16 and the rebid shows 11+ to 13. I guess if you play 14-16 throughout you can call this 'down the middle minus 1 HCP'. This works well if you want to narrow your range for 1x - 1y - 1NT and still be able to open some/most/all 11-counts. Also your frequency of opening 1NT is significantly higher whilst keeping most of the advantages. Things might be more complicated in some countries where they don't like the 2minor weak-strong opening bids. This is all in a structure where 2♣ is strong or weak2 in diamonds, 2♦ is strong or weak two in hearts (or the standard multi: strong or weak two in either major). If you are not allowed to mix strong and weak variants you have much less space at the 2-level. The biggest disadvantage is unsound 2NT contracts when you have 17 opposite 5 (courtesy response to 1 in a minor) and the rest is in 1NT passed out. But you get those back where THEY are in 2NT and you are in 1NT. I'm very interested in Fred's statement that the weak NT system causes more stupid mistakes. Is this also because you were having doubts about making the bid when it came up, especially when vulnerable?

I was about to pass when I decided that I could get away with something here and I bid 3♥ instead. That didn't work the way I wanted as partner raised to 4♥ (opps silent) and tabled: AKQxxx Axx xx Kx 12 tricks later... Anyway, the opponents at the other table managed this auction: 1♥ with my hand 1♠ by responder after long thought 2♥ More long thought by responder. 6♥ <so much for science> Oh well... Finding the slam legitimately is not so easy as the ♣Q is very important. You might want to bid it 'on momentum' though: Pass - 1♠ 2♥ - 3♥ 4♦ - 4NT 5♠ - 6♥

I play Frances' approach, the confidence showing redouble by responder.

@mila: If you choose Multi please vote 2♥. Multi is not part of the system for this hand. @Free: If someone wants to vote "other" (s)he is in my humble opinion "crazy", that's why there is no "other" category. I made the list and checked it twice, and found no reasonable bid missing. @cherdano: I like to open light but not on junk, which is conservative compared with some frequent posters :) Unless, of course, I am playing a system that is taylormade for weak opening bids. In the league in 2004 I played Magic Diamond and in that system I would have opened ALL the Zar-hands, but not in a standard approach.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sxhkjt9xxxdaxxcqx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 2nd seat unfavorable in a Team match against weaker opponents. Your bid?