PhilKing

The chances of us holding a weak 65 on this auction are as close to zero as makes no difference.

1♠? Might have to click on the GIB explanation box for a passed hand double. But in principle, I don't think it's right to ask a robot it's opinion here.

I may be out of line but I have put you on ignore. I think it's for the best.

TD's are not that great at this based on the traveller.

I don't think that's entirely the case. We still get all the trumps over the weak two penalties, and the trumps under situations are somewhat rarer. The big plus is that we don't get frozen out, even against ABC players. Say we have a 4144 16 count, and it goes 2♦-pass-2♠. Playing standard, we have to pass, and there are plenty of ways that can work out badly, but it's extremely unlikely that we can pass and take them for a number. My rule of thumb for an either/or double is that with shortage in the bid suit, we double with standard values, but with length in the bid suit, we need about a queen extra (I've done it this way since about 1996 - not as long as Gnasher, of course). This means that if partner forces to game we are fine, and if 2/3M gets passed out we have not missed much.

Even with no carry-over, it's still important for your NGS rating. ;)

Yeah, I guess we need one of the cues to promise five hearts and a game force. With the majors the other way round, we can jump to 3♠ showing five(and forcing), I think.

Sorry - it was a foolish mistake on my part. When Wombatica said, "I am hoping for some more diverse opinions", I took that to mean he/she wanted some more diverse opinions. It is quite probable that Wombatica does not play RKCB, but if one plays on BBO or in a random club in Australia, there is a non-zero chance that they mean it as RKCB, so it behooves one to respond accordingly. Anyway, it's probably best to leave the sarcasm to those that are still part of the Commonwealth. :P

I'm only guessing, but here goes: 1. North. 2. South makes a bid that does not involve passing a cue bid.

Yeah, if only I had considered this whilst examining about 200 hands where the Multi has come up in top level play. I don't really understand the problem you are referring to - say partner has a 1435 12 count, he cue bids 3♠. I guess I could play 2NT followed by 3♠ as a 1543 twelve count, but personally I would just tend to overcall 2♥ on that, thankful that the multi lets us come in lower. Anyway, the two-way doubles idea comes from the Rodwell booklet from the late 90s.

Without discussion I would assume RKCB.

It was noble not to wait for Patch to dig a bigger hole. FWIW, Ireland's finest also passed, as did my team mate, but it clearly boils down to preempting style. The passes were somewhat predicated on trying to avoid a huge loss, since both teams were a near lock for the final (this was the last match of qualifying). Personally, I hate pass. But that's mainly because I prefer strong preempts.

Interesting. I see that two out of five declarers went down in 4♥ on the singleton spade lead (half of the players that did not make a bum claim). So I think it's fair to say the ruling was questionable.

fyp

5♦. More than one way to win, and the wins are bigger than the losses from passing.

Clearly you should accept the undo, otherwise no one will ever sub in these circumstances, and the partner of the 7NT bidder will also potentially leave. And this is in the right forum, since the laws of bridge do not necessarily apply to BBO tournies.

The recommendation is two-way doubles - not two-way passes of the double! :o :ph34r:

.

This is quite a frequent and important auction, and I have quite a few instances of it in my multi files. My answer to this one is that it should not exist. A savvy West can (and sometimes will) make a psychic pass of 3♥. It's not so likely at these colours but is a huge danger when we are at red. To protect ourselves, I think it is necessary to play a two way double over 3♥ showing a takeout double of EITHER major (I also favour 2-way doubles in all the parallel sequences (2D-X-2M-X 2D-X-3M-X and 2X-p-2M-X). Opener now can't screw with us - he has to reveal whether he has hearts or spades. The next double from either side should also be for takeout. Make the auction exactly the same, but with us doubling twice, then I agree it shows a strong flexi hand with exactly five hearts and short spades. And without discussion I would have the same interpretation of the actual auction, but we all know what happens when people don't know what they are doing against a multi. The agreement is pretty simple - two-way double of all pass/correct bids.

There are a couple of mistakes here. Partner could have four hearts, and he could even have six.

Why did he not bid 3♠ on the previous round?

I think it was a little stronger, but standards are slipping.

This is the standard meaning for 3♥, but quite a few of the English contingent on BBO forum play it as showing five hearts and a hand a bit too good for 2♥. I can't see anything strong with your approach, and I think partner would raise on the chance that there is a tenth trick somewhere.

Sorry MikeH, but I think North HAS to be worth a raise to 3♥ - you can basically count 9 tricks on a dummy reversal (possibly even opposite a 3514 zero count), and partner can go on to game with an extra trick. And I think there is a considerable chance that a jump to 3♥ by south will lead to a minus. Sure, 2♥ is not invitational, but that can't mean don't raise with five primes and a fit. Anyway, the people who raise all the way to FOUR hearts as North are getting too excited. Raising to three is almost certain to get the job done when game is on, and you are just punishing partner when nine tricks are the limit. Sure, you might fluke 10 tricks opposite Qxx xxxxx x xxxx, but if partner passes 3♥ game is not likely to be cold.

What is my 13th card?