Antrax

Let's say the rules of Bridge forbade bidding immediately after a non-pass bid*. i.e. if N bids E is barred and then S can respond and W is barred again. Essentially the side that opens the bidding has the bidding all to themselves until they decide on a final contract, and then the opponents are free to pick up by balancing and bidding up and so forth. I wonder if this game would be playable. I have some ideas what would happen but they involve a lot of hand-waving. If I'm not the only one who thinks it's an interesting direction, I'll be glad to hear your opinions. * the thread title did warn you

Alternatively, overcall 1NT which increases your chances of declaring.

Rainer, do you think E would bid 4NT over a weak 1NT opener looking at ♠A ♥KQ ♦xxxxx ♣xxxxx ? The vulnerability is nice, but it's take a huge risk and for what? I dunno, maybe it's only players in my level, but when it's easy for the opponents to penalize (because they're looking at trump tricks and because there will be no ambiguity about the meaning of double) I try to avoid preempting on crap.

You do realize TDs also make what would appear to an outsider to be deciding an outcome based on some unquantifiable merit, right?

Honestly this seems pretty simple. We're missing 13 HCP in the majors. Partner has 12 of them. 6♥ seems like a good spot. No?

You can hold your finger on the bid, it pops up a description near the top of the screen.

Which is why I psyched, really, I didn't even check the bid description until after the hand. However, as you know GIB often thinks a desire to compete shows extra strength rather than just shape.

Because he's more likely to expect AKQxxxxx to run than AKJxxxx.

I can't believe you didn't go with my idea. Look how well it works: 2♥-(P)-P-??? S will usually have a weak 2 in hearts, so W couldn't act directly over it. N knows from his own hand that S has a 3=4=3=3 hand with less than 4 controls. Now E is in a bind. Should he balance and risk finding out S had the weak 2 variety and N has a lot of points and heart shortness? And even if he wanted to balance, what with? 2♠ shows both minors and X is keycard in clubs as per the suggested defense. He could bid 2NT showing 5-5 in the higher unbid suits but what if west is 2=3=2=5? This is much better for N/S than the "standard" auction. They end up a level lower and in a single round of bidding, putting tremendous pressure on the opponents.

I'm with you. I mistakenly put it in a post that had Bridge content, though :( I think it fits well with the 2♦ bid and as this hand demonstrates, it works in 100% of the cases.

I'd not super-accept but would accept a game invite, as south. So now we have one of each, I think. Is the idea to open 2♥ with a weak 2 in hearts or a 3=4=3=3 strong NT hand with less than 4 controls?

Presumably to show two places to play, or keep 3NT in the picture?

Basic bots. [hv=pc=n&w=skt97hkq82d6cak95&e=sjh7653dkq52cqjt8&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp1sppd2s(Psyche.%20Shows%2015-22%2C%20I%20had%20a%206%3D2%3D4%3D1%2011-count)3s(16%20TP%2C%20forcing)ppp]266|200[/hv] For completeness' sake, S had ♠AQ8643 ♥J9 ♦AT74 ♣7

1♣-1♠ 1NT-2♦1 2♠2-3♥3 4♥ 1 - NMF, shows 12+ HCP 2 - 3 spades 3 - natural, 4+ hearts. Forcing to game. Now 4NT by responder is keycard for spades, despite the heart raise showing four. Why would that be? Aren't we more interested in the strength of the 4-4 fit? As an aside, isn't it better to show 4 cards in the other major before 3 card support?

Let me know if you do, because that's what I did. That's not true. The descriptions are what the bot understands from your bidding. If you "just play bridge" you will confuse the bots. That's not to say it's bad strategy, but just so you understand what it is you're doing.

Yeah, instant tourney so basic bots. 2♣ after doubling and the 1♠ response shows 18-21 TP, 3-♠, rebiddable ♣. 2♣ as an overcall shows 5+ ♣, 10+ HCP, 11-18 TP.

[hv=?lin=pn|iandayre,~~M11023ei,~~M12069sd,~~M14153x4|st||md|3S25AH4JQKD7C278KA%2CS78H356D259TJC56Q%2CS34TQH279TD68AC4J%2C|rh||ah|Board%205|sv|n|mb|p|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|d|an|Takeout%20double%20--%203-5%20C%3B%202-%20D%3B%203-4%20H%3B%203-|mb|p|mb|1S|an|4%2B%20S%3B%209-%20total%20points%20|mb|p|mb|2D|an|2-4%20C%3B%202-4%20D%3B%202-4%20H%3B%202-4%20S%3B%2018%2B%20total%20po|mb|p|mb|3H|an|4%2B%20H%3B%204%2B%20S%3B%207-9%20total%20points%3B%20forcing%20to%203N%20|mb|p|mb|4H|an|2-4%20C%3B%202-4%20D%3B%203-4%20H%3B%202-4%20S%3B%2018-23%20total%20|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pc|DK|pc|D7|pc|D2|pc|DA|pc|C4|pc|C3|pc|CA|pc|C5|pc|CK|pc|C6|pc|CJ|pc|C9|pc|C2|pc|CQ|pc|HT|pc|CT|pc|H2|pc|HA|pc|HJ|pc|H3|pc|H8|pc|H4|pc|H5|pc|H9|pc|H7|pc|S9|pc|HK|pc|H6|pc|C8|pc|D5|pc|S3|pc|D3|pc|C7|pc|S8|pc|D6|pc|D4|pc|SA|pc|S7|pc|S4|pc|S6|pc|S2|pc|DJ|pc|ST|pc|SJ|pc|DQ|pc|HQ|pc|D9|pc|D8|pc|S5|pc|DT|pc|SQ|pc|SK|]400|300[/hv] Looking at the traveller, you should take credit yourself. Others have doubled and then bid 2♣ which got N declaring 3N. One guy bid 2♣ over 1♦ and got to 4♥ by S, failing to deal with the spade lead. So, it looks what won the hand was double and then cue bid. Here's one poor guy who didn't get your intelligent GIB: [hv=?lin=pn|idarly,~~M6229,~~M6227,~~M6228|st||md|3S25AH4JQKD7C278KA%2CS78H356D259TJC56Q%2CS34TQH279TD68AC4J%2C|rh||ah|Board%205|sv|n|mb|p|mb|1D|an|Minor%20suit%20opening%20--%203%2B%20D%3B%2011-21%20HCP%3B%2012-22%20total%20points%20|mb|d|an|Takeout%20double%20--%203-5%20C%3B%202-%20D%3B%203-4%20H%3B%203-4%20S%3B%2012%2B%20total%20points|mb|p|mb|1S|an|4%2B%20S%3B%209-%20total%20points%20|mb|p|mb|2D|an|2-4%20C%3B%202-4%20D%3B%202-4%20H%3B%202-4%20S%3B%2018%2B%20total%20points%3B%20at%20best%20stop%20in%20D|mb|p|mb|3N|an|5-%20H%3B%204-5%20S%3B%209%2B%20HCP%3B%209-%20total%20points%3B%20likely%20stop%20in%20D%20|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pc|DK|pc|D7|pc|D2|pc|D6|pc|D3|pc|C2|pc|D9|pc|D8|pc|DJ|pc|DA|pc|DQ|pc|S2|pc|H9|pc|H8|pc|HK|pc|H3|pc|H4|pc|H5|pc|HT|pc|HA|pc|D4|pc|C7|pc|DT|pc|S3|pc|D5|pc|H7|pc|S9|pc|C8|pc|C6|pc|C4|pc|C3|pc|CK|pc|CA|pc|C5|pc|CJ|pc|C9|pc|HQ|pc|H6|pc|H2|pc|S6|pc|HJ|pc|S8|pc|S4|pc|CT|pc|SA|pc|S7|pc|ST|pc|SJ|pc|S5|pc|CQ|pc|SQ|pc|SK|]400|330[/hv]

The issue here isn't should responder drive to slam. It's that when responder wants to drive to slam, there's no intelligent way to do so. You can bid slam, you can do pessimistic keycard, or you can fake a suit at the 5-level and see if GIB has anything smart to say about that. Cue bidding would've been a much more straightforward way to go about things, I feel.

I rarely get these, so if I'm not the only one, here's a spoilered solution.

I was recently dealt a nice 0=6=3=4 hand opposite GIB's 2NT opening. 2NT-3♦ 3♥-4♣ 4♥ So far so good. I've shown five of my six hearts and all of my clubs, as well as a hand at least good enough to force game. The problem is that now I had no slam move. New suits after GIB's 4♥ (which confirmed 3 card support according to the description) were still natural, showing 4+ cards. Bidding clubs again showed a 6-5 with longer clubs. My only slammish move, besides bidding slam, was RKCB. The alternative was to raise hearts directly, which shows some SI and six hearts, but I felt it was better to pattern out. I think 4♥ should set trump with new suits being cue bids. I admit I haven't checked what 5♥ would've been, it's usually some sort of general slam try, but probably cue bidding would be better if available.

I experience occasional bot slowness in the iPad app on anonymous play, but I had the same on 3.6 and previous versions too. Always thought it just means server load. If you wait long enough the bot eventually plays a card.

You can spoiler both hands and ask people to only peek at one, and state whether they agree with the bids that hand made.

I read your argument as "lowering the bar on writing a book will flood the market with books, making it very difficult to find the good ones". How is Internet journalism different? It is because you never like newspapers to begin with? Then replace whatever you want with the internet, because the entry bar on pretty much everything has been lowered. The result was higher quality to go with the flood of trash. Rating sites flourish and everything works out in the end.

See Zel, that's trolling. You still have a way to go.

By the same logic, the death of paper news means we will no longer be able to know what's happening in the world because anyone can make stuff up on the internet.