FelicityR

Like many people, I am not happy with what is happening with politics in this country, but this portrayal of Nigel Farage and his Brexit Party is laughable. https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/editorpicks/nigel-farage-is-the-most-dangerous-man-in-britain/ar-AAC3NbT?ocid=spartandhp Many people would agree that the most dangerous man in Britain is Jeremy Corbyn, the half-witted (virtually uneducated - no degrees or diplomas) Labour leader, who cannot root out anti-Semitism in his own party, lays wreathes at Middle Eastern terrorist's funerals, and counts former terrorists as his friends. He has lost a sizable number of Labour voters because many of his 'working class' voters see him for what he is. Hence their support for Farage - admittedly not for me - but infinitely more patriotic than the British-despising Corbyn and his band of front bench henchmen and women. And by the way, I was a Labour (democratic) supporter until a few years ago, despite my middle-class roots and upbringing as for many years I worked in the National Health Service, a great institution.

If you are playing against a system that you do not know, you should always ask what a bid means, especially in a competitive auction. Simple. North/South griping about a result where their own bidding and/or play is atrocious or has been misunderstood, but remaining deaf-mute throughout the auction is just a case of sour grapes. My opinion on your ruling: You did the best you can given the ineptitude of North/South, though that doesn't excuse East/West for failing to alert.

If I were desperate for a top against mediocre opposition I might think about it at MPs, but even three looks a level too high with these cards. A trump lead is indicated on the bidding. Too many losers outside the spade suit. Twist or stick? I'm sticking. Pass.

You're not breaking any rule here if you play in England. This hand meets the Rule of 19 criteria. Length of two longest suits 6-4 added to HCPs (9) = 19. Open 1H

I have to say it as it is, but frankly 7C is an awful bid. It was lucky. Partner wants to play 6NT from his/her side of the table. You have to trust your partner, even one that bashes out 4NT after a single opening bid.

Rubber bridge. Game +40 to North/South. This distributional hand was dealt to my partner (East). South opened 2C - he is known to be an overbidder by nature - and North bid 2D (waiting). What do you feel is the right bid on this hand. (And how would you bid it playing IMPs or MPs?) And as always, thank you for your replies. [hv=pc=n&e=sh8dkjt64ckqt9642&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=2c(Strong%20GF)p2d(Waiting)]133|200[/hv]

The moral of the story is, perhaps: Always Trust Your Partner. As for this statement: So declarer was in fact 2551. She had mis-sorted her hand initially, thinking she was 46 in the red suits.. It may be true but I am a sceptic. With two red suits, declarer would rather be in a 4 heart contract than a 5 diamond contract one level higher. By bidding diamonds then reversing in hearts she keeps the bidding forcing and lower than a 1H - 3D high level reverse

If the opponents have a fit in spades then it's likely (but not guaranteed) 3NT will go down, and the one thought that crosses my mind is that as South we as have so many good cards in the minors and the opponents have overcalled vulnerable that the overcaller's spade suit will be half-decent to good. We have the majority of the points but no sensible bid available. Using Lebensohl could also leave us in a disastrous contract. Given that one opponent has passed already, my partner would be more emboldened to open 1NT vulnerable with a lower range of 12, and these days it could include a 5 card major, even in Acol. I'm in the 'Pass' camp, admittedly a tad annoyed that I have been 'fixed' but maybe the hands are such a misfit - and we've been given a warning that bad breaks exist - that any contract by both sides is doomed to failure. Anyway, who's not to say that the opponents end up in a minor suit contract at the three level, vulnerable, with less HCPs than us? That might be a nice penalty, better than a vulnerable game.

Your partner (bialk2) has 5000+ log-ins and considers herself an 'intermediate' but obviously has no concept of what a negative double is... ...and you have 5000+ logins too and consider yourself 'advanced' - the same level as me on BBO - and respond at the lowest (non-forcing) level with a very strong hand when partner has made what seems like a negative double... And you wonder why you didn't reach game, or extract a nice penalty from the opponents on this hand? I think the blame lies squarely with both of you on this hand. There's many people on BBO who are decent card players and rate themselves higher than their true standard. But to be at a certain level you need to have card knowledge and and an idea of bidding for that level. Just saying... ...and all the other commentators have said similarly.

I'm only advanced not an expert, and I am not a great fan of MPs as it's a completely different game to IMPs - where making the contract matters, not so much the overtricks - but playing MPs I have always believed that making a contract is your first priority, and if you can steal an overtrick or two in the subsequent play that's a small bonus. Without doubt many good players will be in 6NT with these cards looking for a top, so you're already looking at a smaller MP score being in 6 hearts. As both the minor suits are 3-3 with finesse-able options, playing off the AK in either suit, after drawing trumps and eliminating the spades is a lower percentage play. As Mr Tu says, taking both finesses after taking a top honour in both the minors is, in my opinion too, the best play. Trying to analyse how other partnerships are bidding and playing these cards is purely speculative.

This was a difficult hand I encountered last week playing MPs against good opponents who were playing Five Card Major Acol. Upon asking, I was reliably informed that the 4D splinter bid by the opponents would show 4+ hearts as support, 11+ HCPs. I was very apprehensive bidding the poor spade suit, thinking that partner would infer that it's better than it is especially vulnerable. I felt it was a particularly hard hand to evaluate, especially vulnerable, whether one was playing MPs or IMPs, and that there were a number of options available. From my cards I had a feeling the opponents were heading towards a heart small slam, so I was tempted to pass hoping that they arrived there and I could make a Lightner Double for the club lead. However, I finally chose after a long think 4NT as (I hoped) Blackwood, knowing that my partner would not have more than one ace and if necessary we could deceptively arrive in 5 Diamonds. It also still gave me the option of a Lightner Double if they still arrived in a heart small slam. As always I am interested in your opinions, and thank you in advance for your replies. [hv=pc=n&e=sj875432ha7dq765c&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1h3d(Weak)4d(Splinter)]133|200[/hv]

Dear Mr Tu. I recognise your expertise on this forum, and I am always interested in your answers on the various subjects posted here, but I honestly cannot agree with what you write this time round. Yes, East gambling to 6H I can agree with, but given all the high cards that East has, I think it is more than likely that the opponents will find a diamond lead if there are two losers in the suit.

An interesting post. I was under the impression that fourth suit forcing was only used by responder to establish a game force. (please correct me if I am wrong.) Some of the examples given could be where opener is 5440 or 64(30-21) and is describing his/her hand further.

I don't think - and I'm no expert admittedly - it can be made if East has 4 spades to the QJ87 (but what's East doubling on?) So I'm going to play West for spade KQ doubleton. I think it can be made on some sort of crossruff but the timing has to be impeccable. To be honest, after 20 minutes staring at the diagram, I am no more at an answer than when I first looked at it. I give in. I'll bow to someone else's superior knowledge of this game :)

I wouldn't even think about 4C non-vulnerable, let alone vulnerable. It's pass, pass, pass, pass, pass, pass all the way.

Vulnerability is the key: white against red is an ideal opportunity. But as others have said disruption can lead to difficult decisions for the 2 club opener and his partner, instead of giving them a free run in the bidding. The other factor is to offer partner should he/she be on lead a safe® option. Many a slam has been made on the wrong lead. Let's say the opponents bid a slam on 31 HCPs missing a KQ and an A. Maybe the only way for that slam to go down, perhaps, is for partner to lead from a doubleton/trebleton towards your suit containing KQTxx whilst the Ace is still outstanding setting up a second trick for the defence. If you don't bid then partner may be on a guess.

Playing rubber bridge once again - no fancy systems or conventions - another easy slam gets missed. Though I don't believe it is at all easy to bid the slam in any system, with or without the opponent's interference. Prove me wrong. (By the way I showed this hand to my son who's an expert and plays Precision and he struggled to get to the six level.) And, as always, thank you for your replies. These are the two hands:- [hv=pc=n&s=skq82hatdkq7432c7&n=sa63h8643da85cak9&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1d1h2cp2d(5%2B%20diamonds)p2h(Stopper%20ask%3F)p2np3nppp]266|200[/hv] I know the bidding in the diagram is uninspiring but that's how it was.

The only player with any knowledge of "who's got what" (as one of my rubber bridge partners says) is South knowing partner has 12-14 balanced. Vulnerable at IMPs I'm not getting involved. Two spades or three clubs could be on, but partner having not doubled the opening 1NT bidder hasn't got a wealth of strength in his/her hand. If partner has hearts, he/she isn't going to know to stick or twist. I'd rather lose a few IMPs than a wedge on a one board decision in a match.

Given the limitations of rubber bridge - no fancy systems or conventions - I was still disappointed I ended up in the wrong contract (3NT) on this hand, let alone missing the 4-3 diamond slam that is available and is - please correct me if I'm wrong - about a 50% chance on the cards. How would you bid the cards in your system? And as always, thank you in advance for your replies. [hv=pc=n&s=saha7dkqt8cat9542&n=sj85ht9542daj7ck6&d=s&v=n&b=15&a=1c1sd2s3dp3hp3sp3nppp]266|200[/hv]

If X isn't for penalties in this specific auction then I haven't a clue what it could show. It all depends what 2H shows: limited raise or constructive raise but with no special agreements then we're unsure. I wouldn't be surprised if East is 5M - 5m and has a place to run and has tried to put a spanner in the bidding on the second round. 4H and 3NT may be on - but I think not. As primarily a rubber bridge player I'll take the money and run on a X.

And the only addition I would make to this would be if partner had a four card major as well as a four card minor in a strong balanced hand, he would have bid 1M playing Acol. This hand is not worth bidding in Acol. In SAYC or 2/1 there is a chance of missing a 4-4 major suit fit. After 1D - X - 1H would show 5 hearts in my system, so I haven't got a bid on the first round, and certainly not on the second either. Two passes is all it's worth.

We had an 'interesting' discussion over the rubber bridge table about overcalling vulnerable with a poor five card suit in a 5332 hand. As always I appreciate your replies and thank you in advance. And I have made the poll to reflect the position if you were playing MPs or IMPs too. This was the hand:- [hv=pc=n&e=st8532hj3daq4ckq10&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=1h]133|200[/hv] Would you bid or not?

Using the Multi 2♦ together with a weak 2♥/2♠ opening bid gives more flexibility to a 2NT responder. Knowing that partner has a good/bad suit and/or features from his/her initial bid makes life easier. And it also allows the 2♠ bid to be used as another relay with the Multi too.

I admit I don't visit BBO much these days, but I played a few hands yesterday afternoon (in the Acol room playing IMPs) where the standard and slowness of play wasn't inspiring. However... You pick up this hand with a casual partner playing strong Acol two bids, and are at favourability vulnerability third in hand. Obviously, you can't open a weak two, but even if you could is it the right bid here? [hv=pc=n&s=s3hkqj986dk98c432&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp]133|200[/hv] I'll be interested in your views, and thanks in advance for your replies. And would your bid be different playing MPs. For your information I tried 3♥.

Most sensible comment on here along with the badger's. You can't bid any hand perfectly. Standard 2 club opening bids - and we know there are exception to the rules - should have a minimum of 5 quick tricks. I don't look at the point count but the playability opposite a Yarborough or near pointless hand. That's what you expect for the majority of time opposite a 2 club opener: partner with very little.