jerdonald

I am looking for what kind bidding sequences would lead up to using this bid. The responses I found on the internet after the 4C bid were: 4D 0-3 Aces 4H 1 or 4 Aces 4S 2 Aces without extra values 4NT 2 Aces with extra values jerdonald

BBO forum, I have been trying to find information about the Roman Gerber convention but there's not much on the internet. Does anyone have a good source for it? jerdonald

BBO forum, 2/1 ACBL Opener bids 1S responder holding: S 76 H Jxxxx C KQxx D J9 bids 1NT Opener then bids 2D Does responder, holding an equal number of cards in both, return to opener's first suit? If responder had another point or 2, same distribution, would it make a difference? Jerdonald

BBO, I am east and the bidding went: S W N E 1C P 1S P 2S P P P I hold: S KJ6 H A932 D J75 C J43 Playing BOSTON(Bottom Of Something Top of Nothing) on the opening lead and not wanting to lead an unsupported ace or under lead an ace. What should I lead? The diamond 3 or the club 5 look like BOSTON, leading either jack looks like a JT sequence and I really don't want to lead the spade 6. Best I could think of was to lead the club 6 intending to discard the jack on the next club trick. Was there a better apporach? Jerry D

BBO, Thanks for all the opinions. No consensus but everyone seems to agree that, no matter what, a partnership agreement is a must with both these hands. Jerry D

Mallowe, Thanks for the input. I have made a slight edit to my post changing the last line from: Would you rebid strictly up-the-line or prefer the better spade suit? As opener would you rebid strictly up-the-line or prefer the better spade suit? To avoid any confusion as to whom I was asking should bid which major. Jerry D.

BBO, Playing ACBL 2/1. Hand 1. As opener I bid 1C with: S J952 H T4 D AK5 C AJ98 Partner responded 1H and there was no interference. What rules or logic would you use to decide whether or not to show that 4 card spade suit? Hand 2. As opener I again bid 1C with: S KJ92 H QT32 D A5 C A73 Partner responded 1D and there was no interference. As opener would you rebid strictly up-the-line or prefer the better spade suit? Jerry D.

BBO, I mostly play 2/1 which I learned from Audry Grant's book written in 2009. I still play standard with one partner and see the pluses and minuses with both systems. I would like to get an update on 2/1 but can't find a good recently written book. Any suggestions? Jerry D.

BBO, Not playing 2/1 Partner opened 1 Spade and I held: S T93 H AKJ5 C QJ6 D 874 Partner thinks, in this instance, I should have bid that 4 card heart suit even though that should always show 5+ cards. I bid the stronger minor, clubs, as a forcing bid. My point was I have a lot of options and would like to hear his next bid at the 2 level. Any comments? Jerry D

BBO, Not looking to deceive declarer or anything illegal just a lead system that don't give away too much. Jerry

BBO, My partner and I have been using opening leads such as BOSTON (Bottom Of Something Top Of Nothing), partners suit, touching honors, A from AK, coded 9s & 10s against no trump, and most of the "standard leads". We play against the same opponents most of the time and they know us all too well. We would like to adopt a different system that, even when the opponents ask us to we explain it, doesn't make the lead so transparent to declarer. Any suggestions? Thanks, JerryD

ACBL My partner and I have an agreement that opening 2NT shows a balanced hand with exactly 21 points. It is marked on our convention card as 21 to 21 does this bid need to be alerted? Jerryd

BBO forum, My partner did alert my 2 club bid as showing 5+ clubs and 10+ points. To The-Badger's comment my partner bid 2H over my 2C bid I bid 3H and he went to 4H making. Again I would almost always show a 4 card major with our agreement but just didn't like my distribution and the weak hearts so I thought 2C gave the most information to partner. Thanks for all the comments. Jerryd

BBO forum, In an acbl club game today my partner opened 1C and since we play inverted minors I bid 2 clubs with: S 6 H 8764 D Q63 C AKQ72 Normally I would mention my 4 card major but I didn't like the 4 heart spots and partner could have some 5,3,3,2 hand. We ended up in 4H and when I boarded my hand the OPS were upset that I didn't bid 1H. After the play I explained that partner opening 1C doesn't always mean he is asking for a 4+ card major and I realize I could have bid 1 heart and then retreated to clubs but it's not mandatory that I bid a 4 card major when playing inverted minors. Any comments? Jerryd

BBO forum, Thanks for all the replies. It's been pointed out here that the dummy can't participate in the declarer's play of the hand. Also the dummy can prevent declarer from making a mistake if it appears that he is about to. So if the dummy sometimes or often preemptively tells declarer where the next lead should come from is he not participating in the play? Doesn't seem like rules 42 and 43 are explicit enough to make a definite distinction. Leaving it up to the directors means that the ruling will vary from club to club. Jerryd

Vampyr, Dummy was just tapping behind the cards but in line with one of the suits. I don't think, in this case, he was trying to indicate anything to the declarer but if this isn't illegal unscrupulous players could and would use this to their advantage. Perhaps dummy knows there is a boss card on the board and doesn't know if declarer remembers it. Jerryd

BBO forum, In today's game the OPS dummy was tapping on the board. I know the rules have changed over the years but I recall that at one time this was illegal. The reason being that dummy could be drawing attention to a suit that declarer should lead or not lead or whatever. Does this rule still exist. Jerryd

BBO forum, I guess I should have stated that I play in the US under ACBL rules. Jerryd

BBO forum, US -- ACBL I use 4 suit transfers and have been told that if responder had bid 2 clubs, over my 1NT opener, that after the bidding and before the opening lead opener has to state that "responder may or may not have a four card major". Other players have said that this isn't always required. What exactly are the alert rules regarding the use of Stayman without a 4+ card major? I read the alert rules chart and can't quite figure out if there are any sequences where it wouldn't have to be alerted. Jerryd

BBO forum, I played in a mentor/mentee game today with a man who fought in and was wounded in the Battle of The Bulge. It was quite an honor. A bidding error occurred on one board. I had a 4 looser hand and I was busy looking at it when I noticed my RHO put his pass card on the table. I put my 2 Club card down and then noticed that my partner had opened the bidding with 1 spade. I pulled my bidding card back and said "I didn't realize my partner had opened". Of course this is UI since it was obvious I thought I was opening a strong 2C. The director should have been called but it was the third board of three and we were quite a bit behind on the time so the OPS said "just make your 2C bid". The final contract was 5C by me which made 6. What would have been the ruling? Jerry D.

Law 23A specifies some guidelines but in my post the bidding went 1D, 1S, 1S and the insufficient bidder was allowed to bid 1NT. I don't see how 1NT is comparable with 1S unless you use the 23A.2 that says "defines a subset of the possible meanings" which is about as open ended and vague as it gets. I still have the same question. What was wrong with, as I have always seen, having the offender make the bid sufficient or passing?

There may be several reasons for an insufficient bid. 1) pulled the wrong card. 2) didn't see the intervening bid. 3) thought the intervening bid was a diamond not a heart. 4) Partners have an agreement on what an insufficient bid would show, real UI and illegal but possible under this rule. 5) etc. I would think most offenders would opt for number 1 no matter what the real reason. If the director can't ask the offender why they made it then he has to assume he knows why. Seems like the director is not only making a ruling but in a way is participating in the bidding. I still think the way they enforced the old rule worked quite well and am still trying to figure out why they made this change.

I agree that allowing the insufficient bidder to replace 1S with 1NT has let him show his partner that he has 4+ spades and unknown point count. While 1NT might only show a spade stopper with limited strength. Doesn't seem like 1NT is comparable and looks like it could be UI. Also the offender could have made the 1NT bid just to avoid partner being barred from bidding. More advanced players certainly could have worked this out. And how could the director know what the situation is without looking at the offender's hand? Incidentally I've seen situations where the director does look at one of the player's hands before making a ruling. Jerryd

I did suggest to the director that my LHO may have meant to bid 2S showing a limit raise but that was ignored and again LHO said they didn't see my 1S bid. The director did say he thought the 1NT bid was comparable to the 1S bid but there was no mention of RHO not being allowed to bid. And the director didn't ask the offender anything and didn't look at their convention cards. What was wrong with the old rule that was pretty black and white. Now we have a situation where the director has to make a decision based on his best guess as to what the offending bidder was attempting to convey to their partner. Is the expertise of the pair taken into account? This just causes more confusion as is evident by the responses to this post. Maybe if I knew what the reasoning behind the rule change I could understand it. Jerryd

The director in this situation did not look at the players convention cards so he couldn't have known their system. I happen to like this particular director I'm just saying this change in the laws causes more problems than whatever they thought it was going to fix. I also note that I have gotten conflicting responses on this post and I don't recall any past posts about the old system. One post said this change doesn't have anything to do with ACBL. Who makes and enforces the laws?