mr1303

Does partner need to be as good as this for 3NT? I think any hand that would have bid 3C and has a diamond stop would be sufficient.

I don't think this is the place to glamorise cheating.

Anything wrong with 1C (3D) 3NT? It might not make, but you are under pressure. Once partner is known to have values findingslam is much easier.

I double. Given the lack of a raise from RHO, partner could have length in spades and be wanting to murder 'em. 3H is too unilateral.

Getting back to the original hand, I bid 4S because if I have to contract for 10 tricks, I'd rather contract for one that has a chance of a game. Partner can still have 3 spades on this auction.

I double. No aces suggests strongly that the 5 level belongs to the opponents. I might make 5D but equally we might not. I think passing or bidding 5D would suggest a more offensive hand than I have.

Funny how everyone is starting with 2 clubs. I must confess that in a 2/1 based system the club suit is not good enough for 2C.

I'll tell you specifically what caused me to give up face-to-face bridge. I went to my local bridge club on a fairly warm day, with a semi-regular partner. I was wearing a sun-hat that I had purchased fairly recently on a trip to Corfu (a Greek island). I played a couple of rounds before a woman there told me to remove my hat, on account of the fact that she found it "offensive" and "bad manners". This hat had no logos on it whatsoever, and was a simple straw type hat typically found in sunny climates. This was a feeling backed up by the tournament director who refused to enter any discussion whatsoever. It was at this point that I realised that what I wanted from bridge what different to that of the bridge establishment. This happened some 4 months ago. I haven't been back to any bridge club since.

This article sums up for me why I don't play face to face any more. If I want to play in shorts and a t-shirt, why shouldn't I? Especially when bridge clubs insist on having the heating on all year round. And for what it's worth, my t-shirts are not smelly.

The balancing double by South is aggressive. However, the double by North is hanging partner completely, and will put him off balancing when it's right to do so. No 1 rule in bridge: don't hang partner

If I was abuse@, I'd want to see much stronger evidence of cheating than this before I were to get involved.

Bidding looks no worse to me than what I'd expect from a random pick-up partner.

Is this a lead problem?

You might look at the vulnerability and be tempted, but when I am tempted, I usually find out that partner had already looked at the vulnerability and been tempted himself. And sadly for us he gave way to temptation and bid an appalling 2NT.

With 6 clubs, particularly if headed by the AK, it is automatic. Open your longest suit someone once told me.... The idea is that you then bid hearts strongly later on, so that partner knows you are 6-5.

Well, don't put 8 solid down as dummy. You'd bid this way with a balanced 15 count with 3 card heart support. How about this: 1H 1S 2C 3S (natural forcing) 4C (cue) etc etc

Why didn't I bid 1NT the first time round? That way I'd get my hand off my chest. I'm going to try 3D here. 3NT may be a good contract.

When I first learnt Lebensohl, I learnt fast shows. I have only rarely seen the alternative in the UK.

What's the difference? Apart from whether or not the abstainer is (should be) replaced or not, which as I said in my previous post, was an issue that I was not commenting on. If your argument is that those who abstained should be replaced by someone else, that is a fair point. I do not have enough information on the case (or more specifically on the USBF rules and regulations etc) to comment on the feasibility of this. If your argument is that people should always vote in situations regardless of other circumstances then I disagree. Mike said the following: "Matt I was just thinking of this situation.. Say one of these women was your daughter....Fully disclose this but vote...do not abstain...... Voting for your daughter is fair.....it is not unfair or unjust... If people do not like it....kick me out of office....." As far as I can tell, Mike's view is that a juror who is related to the defendent (or victim) would be a suitable juror. It is my view that he or she would not be.

Well, I voted for Arend and Matt, since on this issue I think they are right. If your position is one where you are expected to produce an opinion based on the balance of the individual argument and not because of pre-biases, if you have significant pre-biases, then you should not be in a position to make the decision. Whether or not people who declare themselves unable to make a fair decision should be replaced or not is another issue, and I shall not comment on this at this time. As an example, take the case of a murder prosecution. You happen to be the mother of the defendent. Are you suitable to sit on the jury to decide whether or not the accused is guilty? How about the mother of the victim? I think this proves that in some cases abstaining is appropriate.

Suit's a bit rubbish for 4D, so mark me down for 3. Give me KQJxxxx or KQ109 and I'd bid 4.

I wouldn't be raising on the North cards. 3 low and only 1 trick is not a raise to the 3 level, no matter how you play it.

If I could bid at the 1 level, I'd bid 1H, but over 1S I feel my heart suit isn't good enough to bid 2H. With good support for all unbid suits I'm going to double.

4C is an overbid with unsupported jacks. Having said that: The spade control is not necessary, since you've already denied a spade control by bidding 4C. Partner must have one to bid 4D.

What was partner's hand? Would 6H have made?