mr1303

Is it possible to have opponents bid in the practice bidding room? I find it is generally easy to bid in an uncompetitive auction, but the problems come in over interference. So far, they've only passed out

Since everyone else seems to be posting rubbish for no apparant reason, I thought I'd get in on the act...... Seriously though, some of the funnier posts tend to be shorter, and I'd rather read 2-3 lines that get to the point, rather than posts that take up several pages, which I switch off half way through.

If doubles are take-out, then partner will have to make a penalty double for partner. E.g 1NT 2H P P X I don't like doing this, as I consider that I've bid my hand by opening 1NT. Therefore I play all doubles after 1NT (or 2NT) as penalty. Following a stayman sequence, the double should be optional, i.e. to say I have 4H, and would have hearts in response to the stayman enquiry. With an unsuitable hand to sit for the double, responder should pull

What we're currently playing at university is something like this: 2C = 23+ balanced, or an Acol 2 in a major 2D = weak 2 in a major, Acol 2 in a minor, or 20-22 balanced 2H = A weak major 2 suiter (Ekrens we call it) 2S = Weak 2 suiter, with spades and a minor 2NT = Weak minor 2 suiter. No idea if this is a good method, but it seems to work for us

My impression of the 2M rebid after a 2/1 was that it generally shouldn't show a balanced 12-14 count. However, given that a rebid at the level shows a much better hand (in sayc certainly) and shows a violent distribution in 2/1, the 2M rebid describes a hand that is neither of these. Such as: S KQxxx H Kxx D A C Qxxx If you open 1S, and get a 2D response, you can only rebid 2S, as 3C shows a different hand

I'm really not in favour of some program that allows people to tell if I'm using ICQ, MSN messenger etc. 1) I talk to people who don't play bridge on there, whilst I'm playing bridge. E.g. my girlfriend. 2) Even those people who do play bridge on there, I like to talk to people about other things, such as holidays etc. One of my regular partners has just come back from holiday, and I wouldn't mind the opportunity to discuss this with him. Such a conversation is not suitable for discussion in the chat at a bridge table. 3) Bridge Base Online should not become a police state. As far as I'm concerned, I automatically trust people, and I like to see that trust reciplicated.

You're lucky. I wish my other half would play bridge. By the way, you're more than welcome in my tournaments.

Hi everyone My understanding of the rules of bridge were that you weren't allowed to psyche an artificial strong opening. Anyway, I think the hand is worth an acol 2♠, if you play them, or some other opening that only needs trump support to make game. But I think 2♣ is an overbid. A 1♠ opening, followed by a 3♥ rebid should be fine.

When learning weak 2s, beginners are taught that they should have a good 6 card suit, with 2 of the top 3 trump honours when vul, and at least KJxxxx when not vul. Despite having played for a few years, and having seen all sorts of rubbish opened as weak 2s, these rules work well, and I stick to them strongly. In my opinion, a weak 2 should show exactly 6 cards in the bid suit. So it is impossible for my partner to have hands 3 and 4, which I think are perfectly good 3 level openings. Opposite a vulnerable weak 2, the 3 level should certainly be safe enough. It is unfortunate that opener has very flat distribution, but give him another hand e.g. [hv=s=sakxxxxhxdj10xcj10x]133|100|[/hv] then 3 spades is cold, with opps likely to be able to make 3H. Also, a hand such as [hv=s=sakxxxxhxdj10xcj10x]133|100|[/hv] is too strong for a pre-empt, and is a perfectly sound 1 level opening. I would therefore bid 3S, and expect to make it. Make the opponents bid at the 4 level if they want to steal the contract.

The news window says version 3.6.7 is now available. Is this right?

The problem of opening 1S is slightly less, as a 1NT response is not forcing. However, change the hand to: [hv=s=saxhqxxxxdkqxcajx]133|100|[/hv] and your partner's most common rebid will be 1S, and then you're well and truly stuck, so a 1NT opening must be mandetory.

With one of my partners we've become so fed up with the auction going 1D-2C when we have a 4441 distribution we've started playing that 1H can be opened with 4 on this situation. Especially if you have a 15 count with 4441, you just don't have a rebid after 1D-2C

The trouble with opening this 1S is that you'll struggle for a rebid if your partner rebids 2C or 2D. For me this is a 1NT every single time. If the spades were strong, with a small doubleton I might open 1S, but not on this hand

I have seen people psyche a pre-empt in a suit that wasn't their suit, to try to kill opponents suit. Generally they have a higher ranking suit to be able to escape to, so this is a possibility. Of course it would appear to have misfired badly, as psyches of this kind have a tendancy to do. I would pass in this situation, and blame partner afterwards. But I wouldn't adjust, however

Personally I think that South is to blame. North has a perfect hand for a splinter in my opinion, good trumps and a shortage in diamonds, but no other controls. South's cue-bid was a waste of a bid frankly. Unless his partner could cue-bid the ace of clubs, what useful information could he find, and RKCB would tell him that anyway. And even after the cue-bid, he didn't think logically about what North might have. A splinter shows a good raise to 4, i.e. at least 10 working HCP. He knows North has nothing in diamonds (generally a bad idea to splinter singleton K, and even then), nothing in spades, and no ace of clubs, so clearly all of the points must be in trumps. So clearly South's fault IMO. As to the other questions, North has no other bid to make after 4S, as a cue-bid like this is surely asking for a club control. North has no reason to think that the partnership isn't off two club losers, so correctly signs off. By most agreements 5D should show a void after a 4D splinter Mark

Sounds like a lot of fun to me, although I could get square-eyed after a while. Count me in as a co-director.

Did you have a specific agreement as to whether the double was optional, or was it an undiscussed situation, whereby you assumed that double in this situation was optional, and your partner assumed it was 100% penalty? It seems to me like just poor bridge to me, and I'd leave the score as it stands, UNLESS there is prior agreement that double is optional in this situation. However, having said all that, the director made a ruling, so the director is 100% right :)

One thing I've noticed. When you click on a tournament, for the purposes of registering, the dialogue box in the middle, giving the description of the tournament, covers up the buttons at the bottom of the screen (register, partnership desk etc)

I had no less than 20 people go red tonight, all at once. Is this some kind of record for a tournament? By the way, results are now available at http://sis.bris.ac.uk/~mr1303/Bridge/MondayIMPs.htm

The biggest criticism of Gerber is the frequency that the correct hands for it actually come up. When your partner opens in NT, then there is far more scope for there to be delayed losers, rather than quick losers (i.e. cashing aces) which is what the Blackwood/Gerber system is designed to avoid. More often than not, if your partner is balanced, then you are likely to be too. Blackwood crops up more often, due to distribution in suit contracts, and hence cashing aces is more relevant. I use 4C as a South-African Texas transfer to 4H personally

Don't think this one is a good one for the LAW 5 spades. And hope it makes. You have no reason to assume 5D isn't making. The K of hearts looks like being onside for opps, so you have a possible club trick in defence, worst case scenario.

My Quick Fun Indy 3pm EST on Mondays You say main director is terry2575. Unless he's planning on co-directing, it should be main director mr1303 Thanks for this Mark

I notice that the latest versions of BBO have an option where you can invite a substitution for tournaments. However this only applies when the bar goes red, as opposed to having a red dot. When the red dot appears, and it may stay for a while, the only option is to (forcibly) remove someone from whatever they were doing and make them play in the tournament. Normally this isn't a problem, but yesterday I registered as a sub for a tourney right at the start, and wasn't called for a while (at least 20 mins), so I set up a tournament of my own. 1 min before the start I found myself playing the last board of a tourney, and had no way of escaping other than waiting for the director to release me. During this time my own tournament had started, and I had several director calls, which I was unable to attend to. Whilst it is my fault that I didn't unregister as a sub, it would be easielr for all concerned if the option was always there, not just when someone has gone red.

I voted for anyone can direct whenever they want to People don't direct tourneys for payment, they do it for the love of the game. If we put restrictions on who can and can't direct, we'll be short of directors. Simple as that.

My experience of the Polish Club system is as follows 1C* P 1D* P 2NT P 3NT All Pass 1C was Polish, not alerted AT ALL 1D was the negative response or natural with diamonds, also not alerted next player to play had KQTxxxx in diamonds, with a bit extra on the side and assuming the diamond bid was natural, was forced to pass. Contract ends up in 3NT, making plus 1 on a non-diamond lead, when a diamond lead almost certainly would have set it. On seeing the dummy, player calls the director (me) and I decided to adjust to 3NT-1 I think this is a reasonable decision. If an artificial call is made that seriously affects the bidding, which is not alerted, then I think it is correct to adjust