mr1303

When I bid 3D here I want partner to know I'm serious about diamonds, and he can raise with a suitable hand. On this hand, I have no interest in playing in diamonds. I might try 2NT if playing Keri (GF 5 spades 4 card minor) but other than that I'll bid 3NT.

I agree. I'm organising several friends only tournaments these days. If I don't have enough pairs to do the movement I want, I sometimes need to increase the time before starting. All these people that play are friends of mine, and as a result are quite happy for me to alter the start times

By the way, are there any plans for Sara and Cecila to get gold stars? Sara is Sara S on BBO (just played a teams match against her). I don't know about Cecilia's username though, if indeed she has one.

Out of interest, who actually decides who gets these jobs at the WBF? Are they accountable AT ALL to the member countries? If not, why not?

Frankly I'm fuming about this. When I spoke to someone on the WBF committee in Slovakia he was adamant that there would be extensive vugraph coverage from Thailand, almost to make up for the lack of coverage from Slovakia. I would have loved a chance to be on vugraph in Slovakia. It goes to show that you can't believe a word that comes out of the WBF. I operated at the Lederer trophy last year. It cost me around 50 pounds in order to do this, and wasn't compensated for it. Equally I didn't complain about it either, indeed I was happy to do it. I find it hard to believe that they can't get one person to sit at a computer for a few hours.

Well, lots of juniors who went to Piestany, Slovakia are getting together these days to play tournaments online. This is one that I butchered, can you do better: [hv=d=s&v=n&n=sak1098xha5dak9c75&s=sh1087djt82cakqj86]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] You end up in 7C with silent opponents, and get the 4 of hearts lead. How do you play?

I would have bid 3 or 4 clubs the first time round. I'm not a fan of walking the dog...

Yeah, I would bid 4H as well there. Note it doesn't show a heart control though, just a slam try.

Normally, I'm fairly flexible when it comes to the language people are using. However, I've noticed that in recent weeks the language from some of the more regular posters on here has really deteriorated, and the moderators have either not noticed or turned a blind eye to it. So can I put a request in that people try not to swear etc too much on here? I don't want to read about people putting certain body parts into miscellaneous places, there are plenty of other places online I can go to if I want to read about that. Regards Mark

I agree. You either need the club finesse or the Jack of hearts to come down don't you? I suppose there might be some sort of squeeze available. But at a double dummy guess, I'll try this sequence 1D 1H (1S) X 2S 3D 3S 4C 4NT 5C 6D 2S set up a game force, 3D showed an extra diamond, 3S/4C were cues, 4NT was RKCB, 5C = 0/3, 6D was "I hope it is 3"

Gah! Why haven't we declared yet? Plunkett and Hoggard aren't even trying to score runs here. It's not like we're going to lose the match from here.

Does anyone else think my comment was out of line? I was only commenting on the two boards that I played against them, and maybe they might have played at light speed the rest of the time?

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=sqj9hqj10xxxxdxcxx&s=saxhakxdak10xcak10x]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Bidding proceeded: 2♣ 2♦ 2♥ 2♠ 2NT 3♦ 3♠ 4♦ 4♥ pass Opener used the Kokish relay to show a balanced 25-26 hand. 3D was a transfer to hearts, 3S was a cue super-accepting in hearts, 4D was undiscussed. Who was more to blame for missing this laydown slam. For a bonus point, how do you play 7♥ on the lead of the Q of diamonds

In these situations, I use the rule of 8, expecting partner to have a reasonable 7 or 8 points. Lets give him an ace and a king that are worth tricks, say ace of diamonds and king of clubs. I'll lose 2 spades, a club, and possibly a heart. That's 500 against their 420 or so. And partner can have less than this. So I pass, hopefully in tempo.

I was given this hand before it was posted on here, and I calculated it to be just worth a 1♣ opener. I also know that the player holding this hand opened it 1NT, a bid that I think is fundamentally wrong. He was playing a 12-14 NT, not an 11-14 NT. This hand is too weak for that. As a result, partner will bid game and you will go off. Secondly, this hand will not be stuck for a rebid after a 1♣ opening. Make it 4 hearts and 5 diamonds etc and I might well change my mind, but here there is no reason to distort my hand.

At the end of the day, if you can't hold your catches, you don't win test matches, something we discovered at the Lord's test. Having said that, if the weather stays nice I can't see the result being anything other than a draw. Danish Kaneria is no Muralitharan.

A of diamonds?

You've really got me guessing as to what it is now Alan

Fiona Brown. Can't say I've heard of her. Do you have a link to this article? (I edit the EBU junior bridge magazine unbiddable, so it might be a good idea if I can get an interview with her) Mark

Hi all Can anyone tell me in some detail what the Keri super-accept structure is? I know it's in the book, but my book has gone awol.

Sheepman is an English junior (U20) who goes by the name of Rob Myers. He confounds his partners, teachers and opponents alike by getting good results despite the rules in every bridge textbook ever written, such as finishing second in the EBU riviera congress, beating a large number of experts in the process. As a result, his bridge has attracted a cult following, known as the cult of Sheepman. However, loyalists such as me who prefer to stick to the textbook are not so in favour. Hence the thread, set up by another England U20, Ben Paske (Pasker). Incidentally, team Sheepman did quite well in a recent BBO league.

My secret to playing well with Robyn when in Slovakia was to smile very sweetly at her and make some sort of joke about what a stupid game bridge was. She now says that she really enjoys playing with me. I guess that's progress :P

A decent pair in the world junior pairs had a neatly filled in convention card involving a 33 ZAR + 1C opening, and 26-32 ZAR 1D-1NT openings, so maybe there is some support. But I guess most people just haven't heard of it.

For what it's worth, a ruling of 4♠-4 when the table result was 4♠-2 is not allowed. Either psyches are permitted, in which table result stands, or psyches are not permitted, in which case it is treated in the same way as an illegal convention, and the correct ruling is Ave- to the offenders and Ave+ to the non-offenders.

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=sxhqxxxdacq10xxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1NT Pass to you. You play Stayman and 4 suit transfers if it helps. Stayman then 3 minor is forcing.