bgm

Thanks kgr for playing the final. It was close and intense until the end, but luckily most are flat boards in the last set and did not create lots of swings. Thanks smerriman again to organize this fun event. It is enjoyable. It is a great experience and pleasure to play against all friends here, although indirectly. Thanks everyone. Hopefully my concentration level will be improved by a little bit :rolleyes: . And understanding the GIB bidding more B-)

Thanks smerriman for playing. Set 1 - 10 : 6 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:0d5de245.2e6d.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1662528142&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- Set 2 - 9 : 7 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:e303271a.2f18.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1662601945&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- Set 3 - 6.5 : 9.5 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:b07a236f.3019.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1662712241&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- Set 4 - 7.5 : 8.5 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:9bec543e.3187.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1662869402&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- Overall - 33 : 31 Quite lucky at the end. If smerriman has made the 4♠ at B14 at the last set it would be a tie. Too pessimistic in the second half.

Thanks smerriman. I have added friend, accepted and completed the first set challenge.

BGM 11 : 5 billyfung2 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:cb1e4705.25e2.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661589151&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 9.5 : 6.5 sakuragi https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:3dcc1b29.25e2.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661588914&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 8.5 : 7.5 mlbridge https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:dfa12d63.22bc.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661243011&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- BGM 8.5 : 7.5 cherdano https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:9ceb296d.2318.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661282413&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 8.5 : 7.5 xbabarx https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:867a82c5.2160.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661093397&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 8.5 : 7.5 natali_ https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:7d3cc679.2160.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661093382&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 13:3 sep123 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:6d6e8f65.2160.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1661093355&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 11 : 5 povratnik https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:6ea5cf4a.17d7.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1660044956&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 9.5 : 6.5 diana_eva https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:7d09f8cb.17d7.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1660044980&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- BGM 9 : 7 smerriman https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:89006e27.17d7.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1660045000&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 9.5 : 6.5 ye17 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:512d325a.165a.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1659881268&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row- BGM 12 : 4 muddylane https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:455f16a0.165a.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1659881248&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 10.5 : 5.5 crazy4hoop https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:a6de4499.1667.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1659886995&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

BGM 8.5 : 7.5 GIB https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ae639acb.1557.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1659770185&u=bgm&v3b=web&v3v=6.3.8#row-

At the balancing position, S knowing EW has 8-9 ♠ fit, and partner has 0-1 ♠ Therefore, partner is unbalanced with ♦ length, worst case is 1444 (and it depends whether you open 1♣ with 1444) So South should know that EW has major double fit while we likely have minor double fit. I am not sure how others will interpret Dbl here; I guess some of them may even think of PEN over T/O as S fail to act on first round. If that is T/O, it should be a minor T/O as the hand with ♥ length will likely to have negative Dbl in the first round. And one possibility balancing with 2NT which could not be natural as S fail to bid 1NT in first round. So I guess that make sense to interpret that as minor take out with 3♦ 4+ ♣. With 4+♦ we likely to compete in the first round already. The most important thing is: Whether you want to defend opp 4M - this is the ultimate question you ask when you evaluating the hand. If S think that is risky to push them to 4M, then you may not want to balance at this point.

That is a quite interested and delicate hand. Declarer has a dual threat - cross-ruffing or establishing ♣. Even if declarer win the first ♠ and play ♣, after E win, he need to cash the ♥A, 2 ♠, and play the second ♥ through dummy's ♥9 This ensure declarer cannot ruff ♦ twice, nor having the 3rd entry to establish ♣ E cannot profitably attack the second round ♥ which gives declarer the 3rd entry

The problem is more interesting if the minors are swapped, for both partner's and yours.

Consider the ♥ suit only. If partner - Underlead from A: play Q - Lead singleton/doubleton: almost break even, just some minor blockage/entry problem - Lead from small tripleton, i.e. 982: do not play Q. So the fist question is: do partner lead 8 from 982? What is the chance/tendancy that partner underlead from Ace?

Thanks for the comments. Actually after rethinking of the problem, the "ambiguous" 3♠ can be more clearly pictured when we do some eliminations: I guess some "natural" meaning of the bids, without further discussion, could be 4♥ = any hand with good ♥ fit to play opposite a competitive hand, may not have many points. 4♦ = big reverse hand 4♣ = big 1-suiter, FG 3NT = strong BAL - typically 18-19 3♥ = catch all, no distinct feature. So all remaining is the 3♠, or even 4♠, 4NT, 5♣ to sort out the remaining hand types. 3♠ could be - 8-9 tricks in m and seeking ♠ stopper (3NT probe) - strong BAL but no ♠ stopper, no 3 card ♥ (we open 3244 in 1♣) ... At the table N want to keep every option open (including playing of ♥, ♣, ♦ contracts) so the choice is 3♠. If S bid 3NT over 3♠, will N thinks that S is just a competitive hand and have some chance to pass without trying slam? So even 4NT have comes into the picture, but we have not thought of the 5NT yet :) And N is already planned to pull 3NT to 4♣ if S really bid 3NT, and we all agree this has to be forward going.

[hv=pc=n&s=saq32haqj32d32ck2&n=shk4daqj4caqj6543&a=1c2s3d]399|300[/hv] We are playing natural 2/1 and want to try the Rubensohl. GIB interfered with a 2♠ WJO. We have agreed that the 3 level bids are transfer, so the bid 3x-1 showing 5+x, competitive or FG. 2NT are puppet to 3♣, either 5+♣ FG or INV in other suit (5+ if new suit). So the typical bidding of S hand should be transfer to ♥ and bidding 3NT for the choice of game (if not trying slam). Given N hand is such a powerful hand and want to FG against a competitive case (typically ♥AQJxxx and out), N try a move with 3♠ and we subsequently messed up the auction, not reaching the grand properly. I would like to hear - your favourable method handling this - any suggestions/comments on our agreement. Thanks.

Thanks for sharing. Zelandakh has answered the follow up question I want to know - what are the useful relay breaks supplement to the original method? Currently my friend adopt a very simple scheme, like +1(/2/3) for RKC of the 4+ card suit (from long to short) and on top with a general blackwood, followed up by +2 = spiral scan, +1 = parity scan for the next 3 honors. The queue is the normal: one starting with trump Q, 3 Ks, 3 Qs, 4 Js and the response to parity scan are +1 = all 3 or none, +2 = 1 or 2+3, +3 = 2 or 1+3, +4 = 3 or 1+2 which requires captain to have at least 1 of the next 3 honors to distinguish the case. The direct bid to game is invitational to slam and 4♦ is the ES. What sort of important relay breaks need to consider? And how do you handle 1) a splinter type problem, where captain has a shortage somewhere which slam is marginal and depends on the wastage? 2) a two running suits + side suits control type slam, where the hand may not have shortage and merely semi-balanced? (It is a difficult hand type) It seems to me that typical QP+DCB/RKC method usually require you to have a power house, near slam forcing number of QP/HCP to be effective locating the honors.

In a relay system where the exact shape is shown (approximate for extreme shape), what is your (favourite) method to locate the high cards? Some will adopt different kinds of RKCB, QP ask/ control ask, follow by DCB/spiral scan etc. And what is your sign-off method? Thanks for sharing.

I agree with what Adam said, but personally I would also like to give up J2NT for other uses. As many pairs did, and as OP mentioned, we can play 1M - 2♣ as club and BAL FG. I think we can at least include the case with 4+M BAL FG case inside, or include any FG with 3+M without 5+ side suits. Not sure if it is overloaded. If adopting this method, after suitable relay like Ambra or others, we can sort out the shortness below 3NT and knowing an approximate shape. So I think it can be handled if the memory burden is not too high for the partnership. This is a very valid advantage. I would also like to add a point that after J2NT/Bergen raise, 4th seat seems tend to interfere more aggressively as you announced a big fit and not eager to penalize the opponent, compare to 1M - 2♣ where fit is not known yet and in many case it is BAL FG w/o fit targeting 3NT and the risk is also higher.

Thanks very much. Interesting match and I can learn something from it. Thanks for the organizer again.

Yes I have been considered about this also. How about swapping it with the 1-suiter case so that 1x - 1y - 2x will show this 5x4C case?