PhilKing

This a a pretty terrible convention - it just leaks the maximum amount of information for no reason whatsoever. Savvy opponents can even lead 5th highest playing 4ths when leading a major, so you end up with less information as well.

Having more room to choose between 3NT/4♥/4♠ >>>>> than choosing between 3♥/♠ when we both have 6.

GF >>>>>>> inv+.

If E/W have no partnership agreement, there is nothing to ask about. Anyway, if they are playing "SAYC" they are presumably intermediates and may have doubled on a few high cards, as intermediates are apt to do.

I don't know until I have more information about E/W.

These are not close to complete disasters. I remember a hand in the Spring Fours where Gus Calderwood made 6NTX+1 on a misdefence and a squeeze and lost 23 imps when teammates went for 5200. Even that was not a complete disaster - the overtrick held the loss to 22 imps.

Agreed. I'm not even playing to trick one (the ♣T is not automatic) without asking a few questions as to whether East is a two trick muppet, a Lightner afficianado, or a good two-way values player.

3♣ has the same flaw as 2♥ - it is non-forcing in Acol. Partner will not be amused to wrap up twelve tricks with ♠xx ♥Ax ♦Jxx ♣Axxxxx. As to the tactic of not describing shapely hands and hoping they find a bad lead as a result, I would not recommend it as a winning tactic.

Yes, of course. Doubling to show two tricks is really useful. Now if you wanted to play it as Lightner, you would have had a case.

The club lead is a minor surprise. I am somewhat concerned that West is 0535 or similar. East's double is for take out in my book, and I expect East to have the majors, so why has West not led a spade?. This is one of those situations where I need to know how good the opposition are, since I would expect a decent West to lead aggressively here if he had a high honour in either major. Anyway, I am going to draw three trumps ending in hand and lead a spade. If West shows out, I will insert the ten and take it from there. I'm still OK in a lot of scenarios, but I may have played it off if West has a top heart honour. I'm OK when East has all the major honours (he gets squeezed in due course), when clubs break or when West has a spade honour. I've thought of another line - lead a spade at trick two. If West blows, I think I'm going to stumble into a suicide entry-shifting squeeze at trick ten. (I've been replaying Adventures in Card Play in Jack 5 quite a lot recently.) Trick 1 - ruff 2 - ♠, playing ace when West blows 3 - ♦A 4-6 - top ♣, throwing ♠ 7 - ruff a ♣ when West has five 8 - ♥ ruff 9 - ♠ ruff When West overruffs, he has to play a trump to stop the crossruff, and East gets trashed.

Well I prefer 4NT. I generated 16 hands on playbridge and here is the first one: ..........- ......... - ..........A K Q 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 ......... K Q Q J 3............. A 10 6 2 K J 9 7 4........ Q 10 8 6 5 3 2 J 2............... - 10 9 6........... 8 5 .........K 9 8 7 5 4 ........A ........- ........A J 7 4 3 2 There was a good sacrifice available on most of the 16 deals. It was very hard to get in over 4NT (obviously they should be hyper-aggressive, but even then it was hard) and 2♣ was never sufficient to stop them getting in. [Deal "N:..AKQT9876543.KQ AT62.QT86532..85 K98754.A..AJ7432 QJ3.KJ974.J2.T96"] [Deal "E:QT9732.AJ3..7632 A864.QT872.J2.T8 KJ5.K9654..AJ954 ..AKQT9876543.KQ"] [Deal "S:KQ32.J952.J.T643 T986.A764.2.AJ82 ..AKQT9876543.KQ AJ754.KQT83..975"] [Deal "W:AQ72.AK8643.J2.7 ..AKQT9876543.KQ JT986.J972..6432 K543.QT5..AJT985"] [Deal "N:..AKQT9876543.KQ T75432.AQ762..A5 AJ86.T943..98632 KQ9.KJ85.J2.JT74"] [Deal "E:A632.T742..86432 J9874.KJ865..J97 KQT5.AQ93.J2.AT5 ..AKQT9876543.KQ"] [Deal "S:JT64.T6.2.AJ9862 AQ732.QJ542..754 ..AKQT9876543.KQ K985.AK9873.J.T3"] [Deal "W:KJ2.AK98754..862 ..AKQT9876543.KQ A953.JT3.2.T9543 QT8764.Q62.J.AJ7"] [Deal "N:..AKQT9876543.KQ KJ42.KQJ54..A654 AQT98765.AT.2.J7 3.987632.J.T9832"] [Deal "E:J72.JT.J2.AJ8653 T854.K87643..972 AKQ963.AQ952..T4 ..AKQT9876543.KQ"] [Deal "S:AT52.Q432..T9432 QJ8643.875.J.A65 ..AKQT9876543.KQ K97.AKJT96.2.J87"] [Deal "W:QJT987.K53..T953 ..AKQT9876543.KQ A2.T8762.J2.J764 K6543.AQJ94..A82"] [Deal "N:..AKQT9876543.KQ A98.AT763.2.8742 J76.KJ942..J9653 KQT5432.Q85.J.AT"] [Deal "E:8764.KQ9765..654 AKQJT9.J82.J2.JT 532.AT43..A98732 ..AKQT9876543.KQ"] [Deal "S:AK97542.AK..AT72 Q3.QJ653.J2.9843 ..AKQT9876543.KQ JT86.T98742..J65"] [Deal "W:53.T6542.J.98762 ..AKQT9876543.KQ KJT9764.93..T543 AQ82.AKQJ87.2.AJ"]

Opening 2♣ is an error IMO. The chances of an uncontested auction must be very small indeed, and keeping it low allows the oppoents too much chance to find a fit. If we are going to start low, I prefer 1♦ for tactical reasons, which increases the chance of playing in 6♦x.

4♣ p/c 4♦ relay, forcing to 5 level

Good evaluation. It's not gilt-edged in Acol, since partner may have nine points, but it will work well most of the time even when pard is minimum.

It's a matter of style. For me, I can double with a 4432 12 count, so I have to respond 1NT. South has to adjust and move with 2♦. Theoretically, we could play in 1NT off the diamond suit, but in practice, they usually raise. As it went, you will occasionally escape when they view to lead a low diamond.

Do you think Lurpoa was banned for ♥♥♥ symbols? Google the threads ... Obv Hrothgar should be banned as well (and he would even have been banned from a poker forum), but mods don't see it that way. There was a thread a while ago (you probably recall it), whre he wondered why he had not been banned, considering the language and vitriol used, but whatever! Anyway, coincidentally, he is now posting theoretical contributions in the non-nat bidding forum for the first time in ages, so he is safe.

How many people know what a 4NT opening means in SAYC?

If partner has the major-suit aces you may still make on the wrong lead.

As long as one only blocks the posters who talk nonsense, that should not be an issue. Disclaimer: this post is not intended to offend anyone who spews constant drivel.

Serious/frivolous is very good here when playing with an maniac. They love making slam tries, but now you can just sign off with 100% of hands when they bid step 1 and everyone is happy. ;) In reality, step 1 asking for shortage is best if we do not play minisplinters.

Knowing it is a robot tournament is necessary information. For instance, nobody opens 4♠ with that, and the carding inferences are entirely different.

What you are dealing with here is a somewhat more mathematically savvy version of 32519.

Personally, I think it is insane that one has to start with double to show all 5-7 hands, but whatever. On the next round partner should definitely reopen with 3♥ to show a shapely hand.

I would basically play righty to be 7141, which in my opinion is completely marked by the bidding and play. West is basically caught in what is technically referred to in some books as a "striptease". On the penultimate trump West is squeezed down to the necessary grid following the main Clee line, but I have a more inflexible view of the distribution. Never say never, but pretty much nothing is deflecting me from this line.

I have a method here: 4♣ = ♣+♠, GF, too good for leaping Michaels (which is NF for me, showing 4-5 losers) 4♦ = ♦+♠ 4♥ = ♣s, very strong 1-suiter 4♠ = ♦s, very strong 1-suiter It takes a bit of work to get it all to flow, since pard does not always bid 3NT. For instance, after 2♥-3♥-pass, I play 3♠ as a relay and 4♣ as p/c without a heart stop. After the 4♣ and 4♦ bid, we are in an analagous situation that applies to 34 sequences regarding follow up bids.