PhilKing

Yes. Is that so shocking? Meta-agreement is take-out double up to 7♦ at our first turn to speak. I mean, it's even written on the card. It's even deemed to be the default agreement at the leading rubber bridge club (TGR rule 5 corollary, which applies even over 7♠ in theory, but that is takling it too far).

Very low. Boys don't go out strolling with their mother and sister, but a sister would have been there if she could. Anyway, she was probably lying and was not even the mother.

I think ... 1♠ 2♣ 3♠ 4♣ 4♦ 5♣ ... is totally standard. If your methods forbid this auction, you are basically a member of a religious cult.

Bid 2NT or 3♦ depending on the texture of your hand. 2♠ is generally played as forcing for one round (circa 19+), but it would not be appropriate on this shape.

Playing SAYC, I would double 4♠ with the West hand.

The auction at one table went (4♥)-6♦. :( :angry: :blink: :ph34r: When asked to justify this brilliancy, the player concerned explained "I expected partner to have a lot of diamonds on the bidding."

After having another look, there is something even stranger - almost all the clients played more hands than their partner. :( Disclaimer - Helness is not a client.

After having another look, there is something even stranger - almost all the clients played more hands than their partner.

I'll gamble 3♦ followed by redouble. It sounds like pard is going to get stuck in with spanners in this position, so I will come to the rescue.

Were I to overcall, it would doubtless go all pass. Partner would then be really confused when I told him I was "too good" to force to game via Michael's.

I'm pretty confused by this. :(

I would only Michaels if not playing 2/1.

Warning! Gadget alert! 2♦ - puppet to 2♥ (various). Opener always completes unless extreme. 2♥ - invitational 2♠ - diamonds GF 2NT - nat GF 3♣ - nat GF After the puppet to 2♥: Pass - to play 2♠ - spades GF 2NT - inv 3♣ - inv 3♦ - inv canape

At red?

It's difficult to play in 3♥ that way.

The hand is an advert for playing very strong weak two's (circa 9-11) with 2♦(multi) covering the weaker range.

I'm prepared to break the law here. 3♠.

My experience is that a 4432 19 count is a raise to three. And that way 4♥ is unambiguous. As bid, the decision is really close, but I will guess to pass. How dare partner ask me to use my judgment rather than mindlessly invoke RKCB!

Two drooler options (even Nige would give 2♥ a five) and no 2♦ choice. Hmmm.

"2/1 ACBL"??? No one bid two over one, and what has ACBL got to do with it. Anyway, I think this should be forcing, wherever you come from.

If a company holds data on you, you may Require that data is not used in any way that may potentially cause damage or distress. :blink:

I'm not sure it would even be legal.

Pass is a decent matchpoint shot if partner is a great declarer and you suck. :unsure:

This.

Lol - I play this. 2NT shows both majors minimum and 3♣ show a max. I am devastated this has made the list. :(