Antrax

Do you want GIB to make a balancing double that could land you in a 7 card fit at the 3 level?

Not sure why it's so strange. If you double and bid NT, you show stoppers and a hand too good for 1NT overcall. If you double and bid a new suit, you promise a GOSH. If you double and cue bid, it shows the strong balanced hand without stopper. I also play direct 2♥ here as natural, so I can see why 3♥ after double also would be.

I think you posted the wrong hand by mistake.

Which is odd because I thought 2♥ is NF.

(Also MP, 620 > 600)

I'm with them. GIB's splinter judgment is awful. When I splinter it seemingly never moves forward on its own (it once signed off with xxxx in the splinter suit), when it splinters it almost always has a singleton ace.

Vampyr, you'd be amazed how difficult it is to source that claim. Every economist on earth will agree with you in theory, but in practice it proved impossible to find a simple example where I could say "they did this and it resulted in that". The good example I knew of (from the Sowell book) was too depressing for a comedy website - you can't wring jokes out of old people being tossed to the street by their landlords preempting tenant protection laws.

Yep. Unfortunately it was already used on Cracked in a different article, and they never recycle.

Diana, sorry about that :( I guess it was one of their advertisers? I normally just copy/paste the article URL instead of using fancy buttons. nigel, there were more sources beyond what made it to the entry - in reality that stuff happens, a lot. I don't remember if the article had that statistic, but bycatch accounts for 20-30% of the total catch in some European countries. The root problem always was the indiscriminate techniques used to haul fish - right now they're just using a big-ass net and throwing overboard everything they weren't legally allowed to catch.

One of the entries that didn't make the cut was a story about how in Marion Island they had a mouse problem they tried to fix by bringing over some domestic cats. The cats bred out of control and became a much worse pest than the mice ever were, it became such an issue they eventually had to spread a feline disease. Unfortunately the story ends there, the disease didn't backfire, got rid of the cats, and they were back to square 1.

Seems pretty clear-cut, yes. No reason to assume you're exactly 0=5=4=4 which is the only shape where bidding clubs is right.

Cracked (the most successful comedy webpage on the internet) ran my very first article for them today. Go read it, tell your friends, astound your wife and shock your neighbors. http://www.cracked.com/article_20724_5-laws-that-made-sense-paper-and-disasters-in-reality.html As a bonus, you can leverage it into a discussion of gun control or government intervention in general, which is what the people in the comments are doing.

I think it counts shortness points, assuming you have a fit. Then again, if that's the case, it should know short ♦ opposite shortness isn't so hot.

Because GIB doesn't know it. I think it plays 4NT as natural in this auction.

GIB plays that 4NT is always blackwood. If no suit was agreed, it's for the last suit bid.

[hv=pc=n&w=skt5hk42dq93ckt95&e=sqjhaqj8653dakjcq&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=pp2cp2n(8-11%20bal)p3h(5+H%2023+%20TP)p4n(KC)p5s(2+Q)p6h(Oops)ppp]266|200[/hv] I think part of the blame is the positive 2NT that I really wish would be dropped from GIB's system. Most of the blame goes to GIB E though, I don't think that's a 2♣ opening and personally don't count 23 total points unless GIB double-counts shortness and honors in the same suit. I know GIB doesn't downgrade quacks early in the auction but even bean counting should get you to 21 TP.

Back when we had downvotes I would upvote neutral posts that had a negative score. Have I sabotaged the system?

14-, meaning 14 or less.

Smack them in what contract? They're not going to play 2♥. How does knowing partner have exactly 2♥ help me smack them in a ♠ contract?

Partner GIB deals: [hv=d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1d1nd(Penalty)2h(Transfer)d(Exactly%202%21H)]133|100[/hv] I can see the case for X showing hearts or showing a takeout of spades, but a takeout of hearts?

There's some combination of time since registration and number of posts. This might be my capitalist roots showing, but I think these systems work best without any guidance.

Awesome, thanks for getting to this. I don't think decent players will often keycard in a situation where they can't tell 1 from 4, but there's no harm in including that as well.

Rainer, in your diagram, can't the defense prevail if W pitches ♥A and E ♥J? Or am I misunderstanding the position?

If 2♣ isn't game forcing, then W should rebid 3♠ over 2♥. This shows 3 card support and is forcing to game, leaving room for cue bids (or 3NT serious/frivolous which isn't a part of SAYC AFAIK). Over 3♠ from W, E should show his first round diamond control and better than minimum hand by bidding 4♦.

Also, there seem to be either 14 or 15 cards in your hand, depending on whether the ♦ honor replaces one of the small cards.