PhilKing

I'm not sure why you need any agreements for a situation where you are not really likely to bid, having supposedly shown your hand already. By my meta agreements, double is penalties. Although you can't have a stack, you could have shortage in partner's suit and hard cards - ♠xxx ♥Axx ♦x ♣AQT9xx (call it 82% on the penalty scale where 100 equals never pull). 3NT is also natural, albeit obviously a punt based on your failure to show a game-forcing one-suiter - ♠xx ♥QJx ♦xx ♣AKJTxx. 3♠ is the only one not covered, so it's natural as well - ♠JTxx ♥x ♦x ♣AKJxxxx. Scary. I do feel like I am the only one answering for what responder's bids mean.

Did you actually read the section you quoted?

The seven is just right. The game is too complicated for Gnasheresque agreements to trump bridge logic. If I play 782 and partner does not play a diamond when necessary, I would want to know what he was thinking. It doesn't matter if pard has AT93 or QT93, I am playing the cards in that order, and I expect partner to work out why.

♦K. http://www.ebu.co.uk/results/2012August_December/PremierLeague2ndWE2012/ATravellers8.txt It's hand 3. I feel no love for the aggro leads, nor do I see a rush to play trumps, see what you think ... BTW I conceded 1440 with my usual dd misere slam lead.

Pretty sure my line makes an overtrick, and it only took me one line .... Ducking a spade is also better single dummy. Ship it.

LMAO. Ducking establishes diamonds? When I said establish diamonds, that's what I meant.

Duck a spade, cash the ace when you are back in, then establish diamonds. East is screwed via a jettison thingy. Played by north, you go 17 down on a club lead.

More than a feeling?

Quite a few of the world's top pairs do more or less that, so it can hardly be all that bad.

He was an incredibly talented but flawed player and he doesn't play any more. He was more of a theorist - they were his ideas, not Robson's.

I used to get angry after a massive losing run at poker as well. And as a passed hand I play 3♥ as a fit non jump, but the great Segal would have given me a bollocking if I did it on AT9xx. Oh crap, this is a lead problem!

Well 4M is just natural for most people, but is far more flexible and wide ranging at higher levels than you imagine. For instance, John Holland opened 4♥ first game all on ♠4 ♥AKJ986 ♦Q8732 ♣7 against Versace/Sementa in European Championships a few years ago. Townsend did it non vul first seat on ♠Q6 ♥AKJT83 ♦2 ♣Q965. I'm not suggesting you go that far, but any 7-4 shape is an auto 4-level opener even vulnerable and a lot of 7321 shapes are fine as well. Non-vul 65s with a good 6-card suit are definite contenders. I don't play it myself, but 3NT showing a hand too good to open 4M is very popular amongst the top American players.

Some beginners are taught this, but it's not what it shows at any reasonable level.

Oliver Segal is now a barrister and judge specialising in employment. No idea what happened to that Robson chap though. Robson doesn't play them (he plays a Bergen variant), but then he didn't write the book. The trouble with fit jumps is that they are not a comprehensive system - you are stuck on scattered hands or end up making the bid when unsuitable. Also, they are a huge information leak when you just end up playing an uncontested game. The Bergen point/trump length oriented style at least has the merit of covering the entire range of hands without premature leakage, though I don't care for them myself.

Well I wouldn't bid it in your auction. For me, 3♥ by us would show five spades, so I would be constrained to start with double.

Two Hearts.

You are worried that the opponents can run five spades? Seriously? The chances of partner having ♠xxxx ♥Ax ♦AKxx ♣xxx are vanishingly small, and we may be off in 5♣ if they lead spades. Passing 3♥ round to partner achieves nothing. You know he is not doubling, he will often make a buck passing 3♠ bid (which may be doubled when his spades are dubious) and we are worse off than before. Just bid 3NT. It's the obvious bid, the obvious contract most of the time and from the obvious side. It also helps for slam purposes since we promise a good club suit when we call off the hounds - with a balanced hand we would pass or double.

Am I the only person who thinks opener has a completely obvious 3NT bid over 3♥, suggesting, of all things, long strong clubs and a heart stop?

1.08 now - I'm nearly ready to call it. The election pundits are still trying to drag it out, though.

Obama is 1.13 on Betfair. Does that mean I can go to bed?

You can go a step further: trick 2: spade 3: club to ace 4: spade ruff 5: diamond to ace 6: spade ruff Now if West started with Kxx QJxx T9xx Kx, you are still home. 7: diamond king 8: diamond queen, ruffed and overruffed 9: spade queen

That's what I thought. :) Anyway, I want to cash four spades ending in partner's hand. If I return the seven, he can lead back to our eight. Then I play the two to his three.

I have no idea why West would not simply raise to 3NT. East's pass of 3♦ was Quixotic, but that is by the by.

What would you do with ♦654 ♣KT98?

I think he's just invented Polish Club.