S2000magic

I'm glad that you are. It's exhilarating and exasperating at the same time. My pleasure. It's out of print, but you can find used copies on Amazon, I believe.

Another 3NT here. Pass seems quite conservative: partner wouldn't have bid even with 10 - 12 HCP, so we cannot afford to sell out with this much strength. However, I won't be surprised to be congratulating LHO when the play is over. Sometimes preempts work; that's why people still use them.

Yup. And you as well, I perceive.

Unless partner notoriously preeempts with a solid suit, there are generally two types of hands on which you want to bid 3NT (seriously) opposite an opening 3-bid: A hand which has a good fit for partner's suit, and stoppers in the other three suits A hand in which you expect to take 9 tricks without help from partner's suit Opposite a non-vulnerable 3♦ opener, this would be a typical hand of type 1: ♠ A 7 3 2 ♥ K Q 6 ♦ J 7 5 ♣ Q J 10 while this would be a typical hand of type 2: ♠ A 6 ♥ K Q 6 ♦ 4 ♣ A K Q J 9 6 3 A good way to look at it is to give partner a normal preempt and count your tricks. Opposite: ♠ 8 5 ♥ 9 4 ♦ K Q 10 8 6 3 2 ♣ 4 2 either of the hands above makes game in notrump; the original hand might make only 3 tricks; 4 or 5 would be about average. As wyman says, ♠ 8 5 ♥ 9 4 ♦ A K 10 8 6 3 2 ♣ 4 2 would be a good preempt in this situation, and you'll probably make 5 or 6 tricks; you won't make 9. (Of course, if partner held: ♠ J 5 ♥ 9 4 ♦ K Q 10 8 6 3 2 ♣ 4 2 you make game in notrump opposite the original hand. Sometimes that happens.) ----------------------- Coincidentally, I had exactly this situation arise in a game two days ago. RHO opened 3♣ on: ♠ 6 5 2 ♥ K ♦ 9 2 ♣ K J 9 8 7 6 4 I doubled with: ♠ A K 7 4 ♥ J 9 8 7 5 ♦ K 10 ♣ A 3 and LHO bid 3NT on: ♠ Q J 8 3 ♥ A 6 2 ♦ A Q 7 5 3 ♣ 2 Down 4. ----------------------- (If you can find a copy of Bob Ewen's excellent book Preemptive Bidding, snatch it up. It's not very big, but it's packed with great information, and it's fun to read. More than once.)

We've all been subjected to nastiness at the bridge table - nasty opponents, nasty partners, and so on - and sometimes we've even done something that, while it may not justify the nastiness, could certainly be said to have contributed to its precipitation. People tend to dwell on these memories. I'd rather focus on our positive experiences at the bridge table. What's the nicest, greatest, best compliment you've received at the bridge table? What did you do to deserve it? A spectacular bid? A devastating opening lead? A brilliant defensive coup? An honorable self-sacrifice to uphold the proprieties? Why was it the best? Was it an accolade from someone whom you admire? A wry understatement from a partner? I have one in mind, but the background is a bit long, so I'd rather save it for a bit and give others a chance first.

This is the direction I was hoping to see in this thread. Thanks. I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions, but they're interesting.

Thanks. I copied it from another forum on which I'm a moderator. I'll edit it in a few days. (It used to appear only on one's first post on a page; I see that it now appears on every post. Very annoying, I agree.)

I've been a fan of the weak (12-14 HCP) notrump ever since I read How to Play Winning Bridge: the Kaplan-Sheinwold System about a bazillion years ago. I'd be interested in the thoughts of the folks here. Here's an interesting anecdote, that highlights why I like the bid: Years ago my boss and I used to play bridge at lunch against a fairly strong partnership. Over a 1NT opener they played Pinpoint Astro: two-suited overcalls centered around hearts. When we used a strong 1NT, their "two-suiters" were at least 5-5. When we started playing a weak 1NT, their "two-suiters" started to morph, from 5-5 to 5-4 to . . . eventually . . . 4-4. That's right: a 4-4-3-2 "two-suiter". I guess they felt we were stealing from them.

How's it compare to Ewen's? (He plagiarized the title, I submit.)

Robert Ewen wrote an excellent book on opening leads (titled, with no great originality, Opening Leads); I'm rereading it now for the umpteenth time. The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge used to classify books in its bibliography as optional for a modern technical on bridge and mandatory for a modern technical library on bridge. (The latest edition claims to categorize them as such, but the books are no longer marked.) Ewen's books Doubles for Takeout, Penalties, and Profit and Opening Leads were both marked as mandatory; his book Preemptive Bidding was either mandatory or optional (I don't recall which, and I don't have my older edition of the Encyclopedia handy.) I cannot find my copy of Doubles; I hope that I lent it to my mom and that she'll give it back.

I just signed up to try out for the US TREC team. TREC is a multi-discipline equestrian competition that began in France and is quite popular throughout Europe; it's just begun to filter in to the US. It involves orienteering, endurance riding, controlled riding, and navigating an obstacle course. The US is putting together a team to compete in the world championship in Portugal next September. Frankly, I'd suspect that they'll get a lot of people with a lot more experience that I have, but I'm going to give it a shot. Maybe I'll be selected as team magician, in charge of entertainment, morale, and camaraderie.

I just joined BBO. Howdy, everyone! I've been playing bridge since I was 15, mostly when I'm on the road (as my wife and kids don't play). I'm experienced, but rusty. My preference runs toward Kaplan-Sheinwold. When I'm not playing bridge I consult in project risk management, teach finance and mathematics, write software to analyze investment portfolios, train and ride Arabian horses, and am a professional magician. In my career I've also written software to run numerical control systems (milling machines, lathes, punch presses, coordinate measuring machines, and so on), programmed the cameras that watch the freeways in Orange County, CA, written software for navigation using GPS and deep-ocean transponders, designed warheads, analyzed mortgage-backed securities, and taught courses in project risk management, cost management, quality management, cash flow analysis, problem solving and decision making, and portfolio management, as well as review courses for the Chartered Financial Analyst exams. In short, therefore, I'm somewhat scatterbrained. I'd wanted my username to be "S2000magician", but it was too long. Sigh.

I just wanted to say how happy I am that Lobowolf encouraged me to join BBO; I hope to have a blast here, meeting new friends and playing some good games. Howdy!