gszes

Temporizing Bid this term means making up another natural and forcing bid in order to reveal your true intentions later. After a 1H opening bid YOU HOLD: KJx Qxx xxx AQxx Your balanced distribution and minimal heart support means treating your 12 pts more like 11 bid 3h xx Kxxx xx AKxxx Only ten hcp but good 4 card support and a decent club suit make this hand closer to game forcing I would start with 2c and later raise to 4h over any simple rebid by opener KQ xxxx KQ xxxxx BY contrast this aceless ten count with no HCP inside your side's 2 known long suits is worth only a 2h raise KQx xxx Qxx Kxxx Ten count balanced hand minimal support raise to 2h AKxx Axx JTx xxx Even though you have 12 count and 3 hearts it is best to bid 1s (shows 4+ spades) just in case you can find the generally superior 44 spade fit vs a 53 heart fit The concept of ALL bidding systems is to try to tell the least lie when you do not have a clear cut systemic bid.

Brexit is one thing but the soft landing Brexit sort of makes England look like a colony of the European union -- umm anyway I fail to see ANY purpose that is served by the x of 5c. It is sheer luck that the spade lead is an obvious singleton (switch the spade 9 for the spade 2 and declarer follows trick 1 with the J to see what I mean). Having said that, there really seems to be no excuse for not returning a spade and taking the defenses "lucky" ruff. so 99.9999 against east for not returning a spade and the rest to west for x of 5c which cannot possibly do anything but sow confusion. If we are totally honest we do NOT want a club lead and would vastly prefer a dia anyway. The best way to get a dia is to NOT x 5c.

The thought process you describe (if rho switches to a dia when they win the heart) appears to work on this particular hand. A dia shift looks vastly superior to a club shift no matter what east is holding. This makes a decision on how to play the hand based on the dia shift alone seems wrong.

PASS at IMPS I would be less inclined to gamble (I would make whatever bid needed to show both minors) since game is hardly out of consideration. At MP playing 1nx looks like it just might be the top spot w/o the risk associated with getting hammered that is associated with IMPS (its only 1 board).

small spade I agree that p is unlikely to have a decent spade suit BUT I do not require that for my lead to be successful at MP. Strong chance of giving nothing away against bidding that leaves us with little clue on how to defend (ie is west around 18 bal or 15 and distributional?). The opps are very unlikely to set up the spade suit for pitches and the presence of the 9 removes a significant amount of the danger of leading from a jack (especially 3rd). If the spade is unsuccessful our backup plan is to switch to a club after we get in with a dia honor. A spade is much less likely to be successful as a back up plan if a club lead is unsuccessful. A spade risks losing a tempo when a club lead was needed but that is why they put backs on the cards. AT MP low spade = 8 low club = 6 trump = 4 dia honor = 3 AT IMPS low club = 8 low spade = 7 trump = 4 dia honor = 2

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr I have been unable to find the hand that went with this please delete this post

It takes so little from p to make game that bidding less than game seems too cowardly. BUT that is not the only reason to bid game. The opps are big favorites to sac (if they intend to sac) in hearts. I think we would be fairly happy to defend 5h x and bidding 4s will make it tougher for the opps to find any other strain.

I consider this X to be decent mainly because NOTHING IN MY HAND IS WORSE OFF having the 1n bidder behind me. Give me 2k 2q 1j same distribution and pass happens in less than a heartbeat. My hand quality is the deciding factor not merely the lameness of passing:))

p either has the nuts OR they have listened to the bidding and their hand has improved expecting most of the opp power (outside dia) to be with east. Since my only real alternative is 3s (if I bid 4s I am pretty sure partner will never balance again) it seems setting 3d 1 or 2 will often be a reasonable to significant gain. I have reasonable expectation of a club ruff (or an uppercut) so 2 trump tricks are reasonable and I have almost zero entries (in a spade contract) to lead up to partners honors. In a dia contract I have the opening lead and any trump tricks I can win. I agree this is hardly fool proof (see cyberyeti) but that is a mighty small target to be worried about. I would expect to set this close to 80% of the time so at MP its almost an easy choice but at IMPS when you are wrong it can be a HUGE problem. Pass is not for those with a weak stomach and I have a lot of sympathy for 3s. Pass = 7.5 3s = 6

east 100% considering it takes so little (given the biding) to make a grand, surely there is a large margin of error on the safety side to investigate slam. The A AK in the blacks probably takes care of all side losers but having only the trump ace make grand slam bidding a bit scary. But 4n is such a great bid since any chance we have for a grand can readily be followed by 5n and if opener cannot bid 6d we forget about 7. I say this assuming your partnership does NOT have those ummmmmmmm jumping around wasting space bids that show a void. If partner cared about a void they would have bid differently [programmers take note]. If 4n is not readily useable I would just bash 6h with the east hand and be ready to apologize if it is a 5 or a 7 hand.

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:fe2942c8.75bd.11e8.ab4e.0cc47a39aeb4-1529631950&u=gszes OLEGRU 25 gszes 23

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:06015832.75be.11e8.ab4e.0cc47a39aeb4-1529631963&u=gszes ICYCOOKIE 52 gszes 9

[hv=pc=n&s=sat8532hakqt5dc84&w=sk6h87dakjt7cjt93&n=sqjh943dq8652cq62&e=s974hj62d943cak75&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=p1s2dp3d4hp6sppp]399|300[/hv] NOTE how the description of 4h promises 6+ spades why is there no consideration given for 55 or 56 hands?? and please try very hard to convince me the leap to 6s isn't overly sad

[hv=pc=n&s=st842hda2cakqt972&w=sa976hkt763dkqtc8&n=skj53hq92djcj6543&e=sqhaj854d9876543c&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1hp3hd4hpp5cp7cdppp]399|300[/hv] I have some sympathy for 6c but 7c is just way too outrageous. the interesting part is the bots NEVER make these leaps when their partner bids in competitive auctions

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:0bb8fbb4.75be.11e8.ab4e.0cc47a39aeb4-1529631973&u=gszes SHUBA 43 gszes 33

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1250f162.75be.11e8.ab4e.0cc47a39aeb4-1529631984&u=gszes NIGE1 32 gszes 50

[hv=pc=n&s=sa542hdakq6ckq985&w=sj6hkjt9863d7caj4&n=sq873hq5d942ct732&e=skt9ha742djt853c6&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1c3hp4hdppp]399|300[/hv] Is it possible that the programmers have decided arbitrarily to convert 4 level contract to penalty merely because they do not think they can MAKE anything they bid when partner makes a TOX --- the x is described as take out? This needs to be fixed and the computer should NEVER leave a tox in w/o defensive trump tricks (which they will almost never have. That should solve these stupid (yes stupid) passes with no defense. If I am wrong to balance with this type of hand sobeit BUT the computer should NEVER EVER convert any self described TOX w/o trump tricks PERIOD (well at least through the 5 level anyway).

http://www.bridgebase.com/client/currelease/bbo.php?cb=ypKQqvchs7[hv=pc=n&s=sqt92hk53dk9ckj75&w=saj6h7dj82cat8632&n=sk843haj862dqt64c&e=s75hqt94da753cq94&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=pp1cp1hp1s2cppp]399|300[/hv] I swear it sometimes seem the bots do this stuff to ME on purpose I NEVER see them mess with bot partners this way

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1a44252b.75be.11e8.ab4e.0cc47a39aeb4-1529631997&u=gszes DERPPP 49 gszes 5

available if needede

I totally agree that just declare is NOT BRIDGE butttttttttttttttttttttt It is a wonderful tool for helping players learn how to play the hand without the aggravation involved with horrific bot (partner) defense coupled with worse than horrific bidding. It has rapidly become my favorite since I am competing with everyone on maybe even the same opening lead (I have not researched that part). I just hope against hope newer players do not look at the bidding and develop some bad habits. I know AI is tough and hats off to the programmers.

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:2c6390da.7407.11e8.ab4e.0cc47a39aeb4-1529443479&u=gszes GORDONTD 12 gszes 28

http://www.bridgebase.com/client/current_client/bbo.php?cb=peNHQA42BU look at hand 7 [hv=pc=n&s=sa962hqt96dk7ckq7&w=shakj752d932ca854&n=skjt8h843d64cj962&e=sq7543hdaqjt85ct3&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c1h2cdp2hppp]399|300[/hv] 2c??????????? surely if there is insufficient power to make a neg x that we might play on the 1 level there is insufficient power to risk a 43 fit at the 2 level

SOMETHING IS MESSED UP I am not even aware round 2 has started and I have 3 scores posted already. NOT RIGHT -- all scoring before the official beginning of the 2nd round are practice not official I am sorry for making your first coordinating effort more difficult FWIW I object to any scores posted for round two concerning me ------- I do not believe the first round is finished yet 6/28 was the unofficial end of round 1 and round 2 has never been announced that I have seen. I have scores posted from opps I played in the first round where there were some technical problems and I issued unneeded challenges (please check my entries).

good problem Declarer has taken the stance that finding diamonds 33 is their best option and they have struck gold. This also means that ruffing a club(s) is a lower priority than a 33 dia split. This means it seems perfectly safe to switch to clubs though this hardly guarantees success in setting the contract.