PhilKing

Where opener's singleton is in spades, the argument runs against aggression - the opponent's silence makes it more likely that responder has wasted values.

They should be saved automatically to your computer. Mine are saved like this: C:\Bridge Base Online\hands\philking This includes bidding practice sessions and hands I have played or watched (although I almost never watch, as it is a tedious waste of time). They can be opened as lin files in BBO Handviewer, or converted to pbn files and opened in jack or BridgeComposer or whatever. The hands should be there somewhere. I use the PC download program to access BBO - maybe it is different if you go via the web browser. Then you will need to get all your proteges to access BBO via the old ways ...

I think this is utterly wrong. It's 100% percent certain that dubious pairs will have boards where the actions of player B suggests that their knowledge of the hand held by player A was other than stated, but entirely honest pairs will have these boards as well, but less frequently. As long as the former pairs are rare, the number of false positives will exceed the real ones, so a ruling with no other evidence would be shocking.

Problem solved.

You cannot understand that not everyone not everyone bids by slogans? Basically 2♥ here DNE without an agreement of what it shows. You prefer one that makes literally no sense to anyone - that's fine.

1. Why should they have a fit? 2. Partner might look at it differently. I mean, there is no obvious reason to bid 2♥, so they may infer that you suppressed 3-card heart support in order to show good spades. eg: ♠KQJxx ♥xxx ♦Qx ♣xxx It's clear from partner's 3♥ bid that they did not "know" you had a doubleton. They thought that, of all things, you were bidding 2♥ because you had some hearts.

They do? The science involves responder looking at their hand. They then invoke the dreaded puppet Stayman with, say, Hxx and a small doubleton. More science is possible, but the cost is prohibitive.

Does this rule exist?

+1. I think this is more common and useful than 4th suit. It only stymies us when we are specifically, 4324 with zero in clubs which seems super-unlikely.

I'm confused. Why can't we cater for both? Anyway, I appear to have an easy 3♦ bid, so WTP. We could be cold for 7♦ opposite not much or cold for 6♦ with 3NT down. Alternatively 3NT could very easily be the limit. I will respect 3NT.

I'm definitely in the 3NT is completely terminal camp. Responder can give preference to 3♠ even with one spade and 3 diamonds. And opener then bids 3NT with any non-shapely game force. Of course it would be better to play conventional continuations over 3♦: 3♥ = various, but usually no strong preference 3♠ = transfer to 3NT (various) 3NT = 5+ hearts NF 4♣ = agrees spades But it's probably not really worth it.

Not that useful, but it fits in with my rules. It seems to me that when I overcall and partner shows interest, I have no need for lebensohl - I can just bid the level myself. Scramble has some mileage, but I don't like the idea that we can double and stop in 3♣ with 5H3C at all. Partner just shows a good club raise and then bids hearts if strong enough. It's not as if double solves anything whith that pattern, and you can still find the heart fit when opener has extras and advancer lacks the values to go past 3C.

.

No. It does not promise both other suits, but it suggests the ability to handle any minimum bid. So to double without 4♦ needs a good hand. If we can't respond 3♦ to double with this pattern, there is something very wrong with the methods. Yes, partner could have a 3532 11 count, but 3♦ may be no worse than the alternatives.

Pass throughout. Having overcalled, obviously North doubles and South bids 3♦. North should pass that - any thought of 5♦ or a sexy 4♥ on a 4-2 fit, should be suppressed. With xx x AQxx AKxxxx or similar, South can jump to 4♦, and game is still no claimer.

Beautiful. I winced when I read some of the comments underneath, though - 100% he visualised the play. I predict huge things for this team for many years to come.

I might be being a bit thick but I thought Meckwell play strong club. Playing redouble as 4+ diamonds is credited to Bocchi. It is one of his few theoretical blunders (giving the most room to a hand type with a low utility) but whatever. Transfers make the bidding easier for the oppo, since they get several extra ways of entering the bidding. That is the cost of transferring in any potentially competitive sequence.

Yep, bidding game anyway. It would be poor to psyche if I did not know what to do over the likely continuations. And we are alerting 3♣ as two-way.

Dump the convention.

No. Weak NT made most of its gains versus 1m before 2005. Because it is so overloaded, the Fantunes 1NT does not appear to be a winner, but it aids cohesion elsewhere. My subjective impression is that 1NT might even be a loser for them. Anyway, the gain from weak NT versus 1m is small, whereas the gain of ANY no trump versus 1♥ is huge - 157 imps over 249 boards. I would say the sample size is still rather small though. 67. 2009 Bermuda Bowl Qualifying None Vul Q J 7 Q 10 9 6 4 K 6 3 A 3 A K 9 8 6 5 2 A Q J 7 4 9 Fantunes bid: 1NT 2♣ 2♥ 2♠(relay) 2NT 3♠ 4♣ 4♥ 5♣ (x) 6♠ In the other room: 1♥ 1♠ 1NT 3♠ 4♣ 4♥ 4♠ Essentially the auctions were in an identical situation when South bid 3♠ but Fantoni bid better than his counterpart by committing to the five level and thus showing the diamond king by inference. It doesn't take many results like this to give 1♥ an unwarranted bad name.

If we were not facing a passed partner, 2NT. My personal method is pass then 2NT = 13-15 balanced. Standard in England and many other places (where we have a lot of multi openings) is to double 2♦ with this, so basically this is a non problem. But again, we would simply pass throughout opposite a passed hand. It's just ridiculous to get involved.

Phew! Now I can sleep like a baby.

I think this is the wrong forum to discuss the many factors behind the Pavlicek stats, but I firmly believe that Acol, despite it's many other flaws is best able to allow flexibilty (and effectiveness) in this regard. For and those with the time, you can view the most recnt 100 occasions where one side opened 1♥/♠ and the other 1NT and see what is actually happening. It may be a deep reach, since virtually none of the hands involve Acol pairs, but whatever! To be continued.

Fore!

Stats from the Pavlicek site lead me to conclude that you should open 1NT with hearts always, but open 1♠ unless ashamed of the suit. Clicky. http://www.rpbridge.net/rpme.htm The edge from adopting this strategy appears to be very large indeed, and Acol is flexible enough to do so without creating too many rebid problems. I've a few theories to account for the stats, but in a nutshell, if you suit is hearts, you want to make it difficult for them to find spades, but with spades, you have the boss suit for competing partscore. A secondary reason for opening 1NT with five hearts in Acol is that you are a bit stuck after 1♥-1♠, but that is not an issue after opening 1♠.