PhilKing

I think the chances that 4♥ is best are low. If partner is 3433, he would double, so I expect a decent hand for play. And with: ♠AJx ♥Kxxx ♦xx ♣AQxx He would have to be a drooler not to convert to 5♣, and I should arguably raise.

2NT. In auctions where opener's rebid promises six, it makes sense to play 2NT as forcing, since if partner does not want to raise to 3NT, 3♦ will usually be an equal or better partscore. 2♠ is more descriptive, but it is game-forcing for me. My first thought was to bash 3NT, but partner just does not hold the nut minimum (Kx xx AKJxxx xxx) often enough.

Pass then remove 4♥ to 4♠ to show the blacks. What am I missing?

2001. There were security concerns regarding terrorist threats in Indonesia, which sadly proved to be well-founded. The event was moved to Paris. The following year there was a bombing in the Sari Club in Kuta, Bali, which was just over a mile from where the event was scheduled to take place. Over 200 people were killed. This was particularly shocking for some of us, since we had patronised the bar a few times during (I mean before and after) the 1995 World Juniors Championships.

Either BBO posters all like to open on dreck, or nobody likes to admit to being a conservative opener.

There is no "answer". Each partnership has to decide for themselves. Some play "transfers off in competition", others play that they still apply up to a certain threshold of overcall, whether it be 2♣, 3♥ or whatever. What you will not find is any concensus over what is theoretically best. The expert default, if any, is easily stated as follows: "Conventions are off in competion unless we have agreed otherwise."

You may have spared yourself some agony: 2♣ 5♦(shove it to them) Pass Pass 5♠ DOUBLE!!! Pass And then partner goes into the tank ... :o

Pass = 10 1♣ (11-13 or 11-14 NT rebid) = 10 1NT (11-14) = 10 1♥ (Hackett-style) = 10 Anything that floats your boat = 10 This is just a matter of system - not marking. We have a somewhat indifferent 11-count, which I would not open. I would need two tens to turn this example into a 1♣ opening in second seat. I would say that anyone who routinely opens this hand 1♣ and describes their 1NT rebid as 12-14 has serious issues. Are there circumstances where I would open it? Sure. Against a very weak pair at matchpoints I would award myself two imaginary tens.

I think pard is a fish and has misbid. Failing that, they were cold for slam.

5♣. I'm not going to over-think it. The trouble with trying to reason it out is that there is a pretty big chance in "impossible" situations that we would not have bid partner's hand the same way. So just make the obvious bid.

It does for me.

Where do you play rubber bridge? B-)

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict the hand was a train wreck.

We're gonna need a bigger boat.

I'm gonna test out their defence to a 1♦ overcall.

3♥ is forcing even when taught in the land of Acol.

I'm guessing this was in France, so they would assume you were mad if you even asked for a ruling - and they would be right.

Anyway, it's an English invention. It was certainly around at the YC when I first played there in 1983, and was known as Woo Two's. My guess is it dates from the mid seventies. It became licensed as Lucas Twos in the days when the convention tended to bear the name of the person who applied. 4-4 was even possible on a Friday night, and I suspect even 4333 in the hands of it's creator ...

DNE. If anything, it probably means I was playing 1NT as a transfer to clubs.

Hand two: If I cash three spades, I give the defence more chance to signal. Win the ace and run the ♣8. If it loses and they continue spades, we get out for one down and a reasonable board (3♣ may be one off and it's not impossible they make 3♥), if it wins, we still get a complete top. Defence is hard, and they do not know we have seven clubs and a fourteen count. West will often be too scared to switch, even when his gut says it is right.

1. Good shape. Check. 2. Decent values. Check. 3. Any decent alternative? No. How is it clear that double is flawed?

Yes. 4♠ in response to a take-out double of 1♥. South's bidding was quite incredible.

http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/play/Convention-Chart.pdf

You are allowed mini Roman 2D, because it is a specifically listed permitted convention. Your 2NT idea is the typical off-base idea which has no chance whatsoever of being allowed. You are allowed to open 2♣ (natural) because it is not a convention at all - it is a natural opening, and so is not listed in just the same way that 1♥ natural is not listed.

Why not just google the chart and look at it?