WGF_Flame

imo, non serious is much better. The main difference is that with weak hands (which i think are the majority of the hands) you will bid faster to game without giving extra cue bid information to the opponents. I also feel its more "natural" and less dangerous in case you forget the system.

About The 1NT, mike lawrence explains in his book about take out double that the bid can vary from 4 to 11 depending on the opening, stronger over 1C weaker over 1S.

I don't think the given bid is so bad, not always need to make it scientific. 6C is legitimate enough for me.

obviously its not a slam I want to be in.

i dont have much experience with gazzili, i think i heard there are solutions for the 5-3 heart fit, and i think of one that could be playable which is to switch between the 2H and 2NT responses by opener. so after 1S-1NT-2C-2D-2H = balance hand, 2S now and 2NT will let you handle the hands with and without 5H, maybe: 2NT = minimum no 5H, 2S = 5H any strength or any GF opener bid 2NT now with min and no 3H, bid 3NT with max and no 3H, bid 3H with min and 3H, bid 3m with max and 3H 1S-2NT-2c-2d-2nt = 5S-4H 16-18 dont know if this is good but it seems to me to it can work fine.

Hello Everyone, In his book of take out double (which is very nice) mike have a chapter about delayed t.o doubles. He give some rules about these doubles, some of them I'm not sure are best, what do you think is the meaning of double on the following two sequences: 1♣-P-1♠-P 2♣-Double 1♣-P-1♠-P 1NT-Double I'm use to play both of them as takeout for spades (short spade suit was the reason i didn't double on the first round). Mike agree with me on the second one(ok i agree with him is more suitable) but suggest playing the first one as penalty.

Ok I understand that some experts play MUD, but even here it implies that most or many experts (maybe USA or Italian ?) do not play MUD. So what do they lead ? always low ?

Hi everyone, I seems to me that MUD (leading middle up down from non honor 3 card suit) is very common between intermidiate or advance players but no serious strong partnership will use them. What is the most common why to lead 3 small cards among experts ?

double is not that great, partner will leave it in many cases we dont want him to. if playing good bad ill bid 2NT.(or 3D if 2NT is good) if i think partner will not overbid when i bid 3D ill take that bid. I think pass isnt so bad at all especilly if playing mp.

it depends also on the meaning of 2D and 2H. if you use one of them or both of them to show 2 suiter then the 2NT becomes more shapy then the normal 5-5

1. slam is ok, i want to be in it. there are many chances some are not just clean precentage, opponents might not play perfect defence. 2. I'd play to the Q♦ then take out the diamonds, and if they do not break, play the high hearts and spades, and hope something good happends or the J♣ is third.

Thanks everyone We agreed on something close to what Free said.

Hi everyone. 1nt-2d 2h 1nt-15-17 2d- hearts what is your opinion about hiding a minor second suit as responder and bidding 3nt instead ? will you ever hide a 5 card suit, 5431,5422 ? thanks in advance Sharon

What Fluffy said is better then what you have imo, but i think there might even be abetter chance. If you play 3 top diamonds and rho ruff, maybe its better to overfuff, take off the A club, if king doesnt drop, then A spade, then ruff a diamond, ruff spade, and play the last diamond.

This should be same as 1H-2D 2S-3S 3NT in normal 2 over 1.

1. I like 1NT. 2. For me its clear to double.

If I am pretty sure they cheated, i will call the director, this got nothing to do with the result of this board, its just something that experience player has to do.

Interesting things might happen if I eliminate the ♠ suit before playing the diamond.

Its not only a problem of not analyzing the bidding, but also not looking at the rest of your hand. I'm sure everyone understand that leading from singlton is not such a good idea when you have QJ109 of trump. Its also not a good idea when you are strong and partner is unlikely to have an entry. Anyway i would say this idea is great if you wish to build a very simple robot.

Its possible that this idea is not good even for beginners, i am not sure, since there are many cases that it will help them get the correct lead and more important get partner to understand what they lead, and also save energy (and time) for other issues of the game. But the important part is that this staff is not what they (Granoveters) play or suggest as best way to play.

Robot leads as some other ideas by the Granoveters does not mean to be the best solution to the problem, but to be a good enough solution. for some reasons people think of these (the better example is the obvious shift signaling) as expert material were its actually trying to give a key for the intermediate pair that will give them good results most of the time. its all Kiss.

thanks for the like explanation. Like you all :)

They should add likes to the forums so I (and i suspect many more) could like/agree with mikeh.

I was just very surprise, Gib bid strange, play a little strange sometimes but never saw gib "forgetting that a card is high"

I'm reading it too, not in the middle yet, I think its a great book, but I agree its far from an easy read especially if you try not to be lazy and think of every problem before you read the solution. very happy i bought it.