JonnyQuest

Matchpoints. Can you propose a believable auction to 6♣? 2♥ is natural. 2NT is a transfer to 3♣. You do NOT play Minorwood or Kickback. [hv=pc=n&s=sk875ha753daq2cqj&n=sa32h2dk3ckt87653&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1n2h2np3cp3hp]266|200| [/hv]

3♦

Or better, PASS (but only when it works). ;)

0314? ~~~~~~~~~ Look again.

Respond 1♥. Do not use 2-way Checkback.

Unsurprising. If your mouth is full of the stuff, you early on develop an intimate relationship with it.

So using Pilowsky's logic, since he is Australian, I should enjoy great success against him at the bridge table. Or something like that. What an absolutely ridiculous post, Pilowsky!

The wrong bid did not get the "top score," the result did. You seem to be confusing the two. The scoring for your bid is shown above in the poll results. If only there were a common bridge term for this, this . . . judging the merits of a bid by the results I would use it here. (Sarcasm font in red)

Forget it, he's rolling . . . :blink: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8lT1o0sDwI

No, you didn't.

Posted slowly, so late on previous post. I'm curious --- why flip-flop the 1NT and 2NT route? I'm sure some genius has thought this through.

I suppose it could be played like this, but it's (the level of slam interest) a reverse of what is standard. (Texas is always 6+) Usually, Texas is used when there is either zero slam interest, or a hand that plans to bid RKC after Texas. A drive to slam. The "some slam interest" hands get to the game level by the lowest level transfer, then a game-level bid in the Major. Doing so leaves room for all manner of superaccepts, in which case subsequent suit-bids would be controls.

Not Gerber? I thought 4♣ was always Gerber?

Pilowsky, may I get a discount? I'm not sure it's worth 2 Rands. The auction provided was 2♥ - 2♠ - 3♥ - Double, with no indication of who made what bid. But you have assigned the following seat assignments, so let's run with that: 1.) "Opener preempts with 6-11 HCP. RHO bids 2♠." ......If RHO is the overcaller, this makes opener your partner. 2.) "This may be weak with 6+♠ since a double might be more appropriate if LHO had points." ......No. 2♠ will absolutely NOT be weak here. You do not preempt a preempt. (Preempts 101.) 3.) "Openers partner can either call 4♥ or pass depending on their hand." ......Opener's partner is you since you assigned the initial preempt to your partner. You've listed a binary choice. Why? In the OP auction, opener's partner raised the level of the preempt to the 3-level. That is another obvious choice of actions. There are others as well. 4.) "Over 3♥, RHO should either bid (3♠, 4♠, 3NT, something else or quietly pass." ......RHO already overcalled 2♠ and you, responder, raised partner's preempt to 3♥. For RHO to bid over 3♥, there would not be a double. Did you mean 3♥ Doubled? I'll assume so, though it is at best confusing. 5.) "A double must be for penalties since LHO has already bid their hand - such is the nature of pre-empts." ......Huh? If RHO was overcaller, that makes your partner opener. But here you have LHO somehow making the opening preempt? Maybe they moved during the auction? Where I play, once the auction begins, you are supposed to remain at that position. It's a good rule. If you first get the directions right, and are clear on who made what bid and in which seat they made it (assuming they do not switch seats mid-auction), the probability of understanding the meaning of double goes way up.

FYP

No, it didn't. I still fail to see where you've explained why and how the Rule-of-17 works, why it is better than not using such a rule, or examples of the type of hand where it works, or does not work. Simply stating that "The clear advantage in a 'major' contract is that 4 is game," is misdirection. It's an advantage if game makes, or if game has a high enough probability of making that it should be bid. If it should not be bid, and the "Rule-of-17" directs us to bid it, then there is no "advantage."

What was made clear? I'm missing something. I agree with what "other authors" suggest. I think it's a good "starting point" for beginners, at least until "bridge judgment" has been accumulated over time.

Unfamiliar, but good partner, though little discussion. In the following auction, what is 4NT? 1♦ - 1♠ 3♦ - 3♥ -- (creates a 100% Game-Force) 4♦ - 4NT

1NT is seldom played as "forcing" by a passed hand, though some do. With a nondescript 5332 hand, I would pass 1NT all day. Also, A 2NT rebid by you would have shown a very strong hand, in the range of 17-19. That said, your auction (as others have noted) was entirely normal. It just doesn't make. Next hand.

27? I thought it was 26. Has Petkov adjusted his criteria?

♥Q

So, you play some sort of bifurcated range for 2♥ and 3♥ here? I've never heard of jump-shifting into a suit that can be reversed into, since, with more than a minimum reverse (game-force) you can just refuse to sign-off in her weakness-showing sign-off. What are your approximate ranges? If a Game-Force rebid (3♥ in your methods) with a massive 21HCP and control rich hand is a "slight overbid," what exactly would be required to make it solid?

These ACBL Convention Charts must be especially difficult to find online, else there would be no confusion. Oh, wait a minute, my niece just found it (she is two). Never mind.

[hv=pc=n&s=sa952hqdakj654cq6&n=sktha9876dqt2cakt]133|200|North deals and opens 1NT (15-17). Construct the auction. [/hv]

Can I redouble? No? Okay then, Pass it is.