Foxx

Obviously we didn't double loud enough.

Seems pretty simple. When you're playing against these guys and you open 1NT, now you have to worry about being eaten by a grue.

Bachman Turner Overdrive - Let It Ride

I'll bet you a beer, that half of those churches have a Facebook page.

http://thedarkhideout.homestead.com/files/images/kittys.jpg

Ask for key cards ASAP. With these methods, we can stop in 4♠ if North shows one key card without the trump queen, and I just have to hope partner doesn't have the ♦A and ♠QJ10xxx. We're putting down 6-7 tricks, the five level should be safe opposite anything remotely resembling a 2♠ bid.

My claiming habits are normal, except for one thing. I never claim when there is a trump out (unless, of course, it's a master trump, which is trivially conceded). NEVER. To explain why, let me tell you about a rubber bridge game I once played in, in Colorado. I was in a vulnerable slam, and claimed with a trump out. According to the rules in place, such a claim was invalid, and a defender claimed a ruff. I argued in vain, and eventually had to concede the one-trick set, at gunpoint. While this rule isn't enforced at your garden-variety duplicate club, I always play as if it is in effect.

I like 2♦ as Flannery when a 1NT response to 1♥ (or 1♠) is forcing. No more 2♣ rebids with a doubleton! When the 1NT response isn't forcing, 2♦ as a natural, weak two becomes better.

♦K, ♦A, club.

Pass, but only because we have three hearts. Let partner, who has the short hearts, come back in.

Addition by subtraction anyone?

1♣, planning to jump shift in spades next, and then bid hearts. If we get dropped in 1♣, we're very unlikely to have a game.

Especially if the whole world learned that I use AOL.

The right time to double RHO's 1NT opening bid is when it is going down.

At the top of the thread, it tells you how many people have voted in the poll. You can divide this into the number of people who voted for a given option, to get the percentage of voters for the option.

I feel old.

This character was not only Red versus White, but vulnerable, too? What gall!

Metallica - Wherever I May Roam

Perhaps it would be better to address these suggestions to the engineers of GIB: http://www.gibware.com/ Their contact info is at the bottom of their home page

IMHO this club should have its right to award masterpoints revoked.

Good luck, Borat.

(1) After thinking about this for a long time, I decided to lead . . . . . . a diamond. Oops: [hv=pc=n&s=s753hkqt9753dcj43&w=sq8642h4dq9752cat&n=sk9hj862dak3cq972&e=sajthadjt864ck865]399|300[/hv] The good news is that we still beat it one. The bad news is, had I led the ♣A we would have beaten it three. Hats off to the ♣A leaders, they got it right. In a lifetime of leading a doubleton ace, I've never hit the king in partner's hand, so of course, the one time I don't lead the doubleton ace, partner is there with the K. (2) This one is kind of unfair to all of you (and me) because partner didn't give me help: [hv=pc=n&s=saq6hakqt874dt3c2&w=skj954hj95d72cqj6&n=st7h632dq64ca9543&e=s832hdakj985ckt87&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1h1s2h4s5hppp]399|300[/hv] I led the ♠5, only a spade lead lets the contract make. A trump lead beats it one, while a minor-suit lead beats it two. After the hand, partner admitted she made a bad bid, and should have bid 3♦ to direct my lead. All the ♠K leaders can at least take consolation in the fact that they prevented the ♠10 from winning a trick. (3) They say there are no blind opening leads, only deaf opening leaders. Well, I may as well have been both: [hv=pc=n&s=st2hakjdt52cat972&w=skq4hqt92d9cqj865&n=sj96h54dakq8643c4&e=sa8753h8763dj7ck3]399|300[/hv] I reasoned that diamonds would be breaking badly for declarer and that the right idea would be to not give away any tricks. Therefore, I led the ♣Q. South now had ten tricks, and due to a signaling mix-up on the run of the diamonds, ended up making five. A heart lead gives up making five immediately. Only a spade lead does the job. If you told me that dummy would hit with ♠J9x, I would never lead a spade. Never mind that 5♦ is a laydown, no matter what the lead.

For the sake of balance, I'll now go through all the GOOD things that can happen after all the calls discussed above. Well, all but one. Opening with a 2♣ bid will put you in business if partner has three clubs (or four spades). The nebulous diamond is certainly not without risk, but it would be money if it hits partner with five diamonds. With a 1♠ opening bid, you could find your way to a skinny but good game if partner has four-card, or heck, five-card support. Opening 1NT could work well if partner has four spades. Besides, nothing stops partner from having a holding like ♥QJ10xxx or ♥Kxxxxxx, in which case you could get to a slender but awesome 4♥ contract. However, I must confess that I have nothing good to say about the pass. In fact, nobody should see any merit in that call, unless he or she is a fascist. Having given the problem some thought, here is my order of preference: 1♦ > 2♣ > 1NT > 1♠ > pass

Let me start out by saying: TOTAL NEWBIE to Precision here. TOTAL newbie. Rather than advocate a call, I'll simply summarize how every choice could get you into a stew. As I understand it, the 2♣ opening has evolved from "classical" Precision such that it is expected to deliver six clubs, or a STRONG five-card suit. Partner, holding ♣Kx, will have every right to think clubs will be a respectable home. Oops. If you open 1♦ (probably the least of evils IMHO), you well know that THEY will compete in hearts, and partner will drive to 3♦ with ♦Q108x. Oops, again. Better dust off those scrambling shoes. If you open 1♠, partner will push to the three level or put you in game with three-card support, or you'll end up in 2♠ on a 4-2 fit. Ouch! Better get ready to scramble like crazy! You could try opening 1NT, of course, but partner will transfer to hearts, pass, and put down ♥Q9xxx in dummy. Finally, if you decide everything just sucks too much, and pass, you'd soon find yourself being submitted as a candidate for an officer of the Fourth Reich.

I'm using Safari 5.1 in OS X 10.6. I see the entire auction perfectly fine. A scroll bar is there, but it stays out of the way.