The_Badger

Today, Wednesday, North Korea is sabre-rattling again this time at the UN. Let's forget the rhetoric for a while. What concerns me now is that North Korea might continue to fire missiles and weapons for practice, not aiming at any particular target, just for provocation, in the same way they conducted their hydrogen bomb test. Given that many of these weapons have disintegrated while being used, and North Korean technology is nowhere near as sophisticated as in the West, what happens when one of these 'tests' lands near or on Japanese, South Korean or USA (Guam, for example) soil? What then? North Korea says sorry, this wasn't meant to happen? That for me is the frightening scenario, a mistake or accident. But how is the UN and the international community going stop him testing all weapons, not just the nuclear ones? Kim Jong-un is a complete law unto himself. This situation is going to continue for years and years if no resolutions can be enforced by the (gutless - in my view) UN. I tend to agree with Vladimir Putin - surprisingly - that further sanctions will hurt not just North Korea but the North Korean people generally. That, in itself, isn't an option. I fail to see any possible solution to the North Korean problem generally.

Hi jlgoose. Welcome to the forum :) Over a 1NT bid, any bid at the 3 level is pre-emptive but you need usually at least a 7 card suit, and a weaker hand just like normal opening pre-emptive bids. Something like KQJxxxx xx x xxx But with all bids it also depends on the vulnerability too. Your 2♥ bid with ♥AKQxx was an overcall, and whilst my fellow posters have indicated it wasn't quite the right bid given your hand, 14 HCPs, if you are relatively newish to this game then it's what you felt was the right bid given your knowledge. It sounds like partner had good ♥ support for you and did not raise. As Stephen indicated, if the opponents open 1NT with a 15-17 hand, then it's extremely rare for you and your partner to have game. A major suit game usually requires 25-26 HCPs so if the opponents have at least 15+, your chance of game is very low but good distribution can make up for that.

Today is Benito Garozzo's 90th birthday - well done and congratulations - and sometimes I watch the afternoon (morning in USA) game between JEC's team (including Benito) and his opponents. I was sitting comfortably watching Benito and Tarek's table with my mug of tea and biscuits then I decided to 'change channels' - have a quick peep at the other table. This happened. http://tinyurl.com/yczezwnq I can only assume that the celebratory champagne was a factor...:)

LOL. Being a film buff I totally forgot about the final sequence from Dr Strangelove. Just feet from my computer is a glossy book about Stanley Kubrick and all his films, too. A quick, horrible, funny - to me - thought came into my head that if Trump sits astride the bomb, and the bomb is destined for Kim Jong-un, then it would literally kill two birds with one stone. (Shame it would probably kill a lot of innocent people, too, though.)

North Korea Population Growth The famine of the 1990s is likely to have had a severe bearing on life expectancy in the country - not so much because of deaths at the time but because of the effect of malnutrition that follows people through the rest of their lives. In 2009, the CIA World Factbook claimed that the national average stood at 63.8 years which, in global terms is pretty poor roughly comparable to former Soviet countries in Central Asia such as Turkmenistan (also fabled for its repressive government) and Kazakhstan. Add in an infant mortality rate that is 12.5 times higher than that of its neighbour South Korea and the overall picture is actually pretty grim. The Government is certainly conscious that North Korea is outmatched by the population of South Korea, its southern neighbour and great rival, and has launched a number of drives to boost the total population. So far those drives have had limited effect the current growth rate according to US estimates is around 0.5% per annum, which makes North Korea one of the slowest growing countries in the world. Maybe these statistics (taken from worldpopulationreview.com) explain to some extent the bellicose posturing of Kim Jong-un. The country is practically "dying on its feet" compared to South Korea. To admit that communism has failed would be beneath him, perhaps. And the only way 'to prove' this isn't so is to take on the world's largest capitalist country in a rhetorical dogfight.

Interesting line, Nigel, you're on the right track, but it's not the book solution to the problem. (Though it would be interesting to compare whether the book solution to the problem is statistically better than yours.) Addendum: There is a chance of an overruff in the West hand, or for West to pitch a ♦ to avoid the throw-in on your line.

Good move, Rowland. Interesting reading. At least Kit Woolsey agrees with me :)

A number of reasons possibly:- 1. Players that use a strong club system automatically limit their hands 2. Judging a contract is easier as an opener and responder than as two overcallers, I assume. 3. Pre-emption in any form, even a light opener, means that you have just a 33% chance of blitzing one partner, and a 66% chance of blitzing two opponents. 4. Doubling for penalties at a both a low and high level is fraught with difficulties generally. 5. Aggressive bridge usually wins in the long run. 6. The partnerships that I 've seen do this are normally very well-established, Grue-Moss, Welland-Auken, etc, etc. so they have a sixth sense of what to do in edgy auctions. and finally, there is a lot of theory out there now, not just stodgy Goren and Culbertson-type bidding scenarios. When it comes to limited openings the Scandinavians are pretty adept at it, and many players have adopted their style.

Good try, but not quite right. This hand was taken from a book in my collection. The solution given is subtle, in my opinion.

BBO's timing of raising prices is not good, though they have stated it is over a decade since they were raised. The number of posts (Lycier, MrAce, Bermy et al) about GIB's (in)ability to play bridge do not astound me as programming a bridge computer is probably - I speak from inexperience - a very, very difficult thing to do. However, BBO might have an ulterior motive here, not just a profit-making one, inasmuch a 25% increase might pay for specialist help with the problems that occur with GIB, and some of the issues with GIB will be tackled and in the long run GIB will bid and play better. Only time will tell.

And that's precisely why I made this post on the forums. Trump will be damned if he does something, damned if he doesn't. I am not a fan of Tony Blair, the ex-Labour Leader in this country either, but when he was provided with information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction he had to make a decision about Great Britain joining forces with the US to invade Iraq. Here we have an enormously more difficult scenario, a despot leader with weapons sable-rattling so openly and aggressively, that action - whatever that entails - needs to be taken before it is too late. I, too, have no idea what the best possible solution is to all this. China, despite its size, wealth and influence, seems powerless to rein in North Korea. And the North Korean leader seems so megalomaniacal that anything could happen...and probably will despite our best efforts.

North Korea's latest nuclear test earlier today is no longer rhetoric but a serious consideration for the whole international community. Whilst I am not a Trump fan, I feel that Trump and the US military are under great pressure to resolve this before it escalates further. Given that the US, Great Britain and others went to war with Iraq when there was no concrete evidence of weapons of mass destruction - I acknowledge that Iraq still had stockpiles of chemical agents to hand at the time - how do you feel this incident can be resolved given that North Korea has weapons and agents of mass destruction available now?

Welcome to the forum, Geldmacher :) Best I can do is 28HCPs balanced, as I remember. Think partner had a Yarborough opposite me :(

Thanks for posting. It's reassuring to know that even great players make expensive errors sometimes. Btw, what's the point of trying to false card here? East can see ♥s are breaking, and two of dummy's entries, the ♣A and ♠K have disappeared. And partner can't have anything to help on the bidding. I can only assume it was a total lapse in concentration.

At the right vulnerability, and in 3rd position, if you open a weak two with let's say ♠9876542 ♥xx ♦xxxx ♣void, is that a psyche? A barrage bid, yes, but hardly a psyche given the vulnerability.

hi Tharinda. Welcome to the forum :) I believe that you will find the replies on here will favour both methods of opening. The hand is a 17.75 count on the Kaplan and Rubens hand evaluator, so technically it is a tad strong to open 1NT with if you play a 15-17 no trump. Many expert players hands will open 1NT with an 18 count but only if the distribution is 4333, with any suit as the four carder. My thinking behind opening 1NT with this hand is simple: You have 17 high card points so it is exceptionally unlikely that partner will have a strong hand. Personally I always like the strong hand to be the closed (declarer) one if playing a contract. The downside of opening 1♠ is that partner will bid 1NT and you will raise no-trumps and this hand will become dummy. (The thinking behind this is the defence may find it easier to locate key cards in a weaker hand, as there are fewer, than in a strong hand.) Also, the 1NT opening immediately tells your partner about the point range and a 1♠ opening could be anything from 11+ There is another small advantage of opening 1NT too as it is usually makes it slightly more difficult for opponents to come in over this bid than a suit bid. Actually announcing that you have a semi-strong hand by opening 1NT could well put off the opponents from intervening. The downside of opening 1NT is that if you end up on defence, partner is less likely to lead your suit ♠s. And you could miss out on a 5-3 ♠ fit and 4♠ is a better contract than 3NT.. As I say, there are plus and minus points in both methods, and no-one should criticise you whatever opening you choose.

Or maybe Precision is just a redrawn dynamic of the Vanderbilt Club system (c.1930s) that, surprise, surprise, also has a 1♣ opener as 16+ p.s. Vanderbilt also 'invented' weak major two bids too :)

No logic whatsoever here by GIB. Just 'calculated' that East's negative double meant a ♠ contract for N/S was wrong. Couldn't reason that the ♠s were distributed 0=3=4=6 around the table, and that 4♠ by South is where most partnerships would be. Mmmm....

http://blogs.findlaw.com/decided/2009/11/man-convicted-of-scaring-woman-to-death.html

[hv=pc=n&s=sat65haq2dq865ck6&n=skq987hdk743cajt7]133|200[/hv] South opens 1NT arrives in a 6♠ contract, no opposition bidding, ♦J lead, ♦3 from dummy, ♦2 from East taken by South's ♦Q . Make the contract. Additional info (after 2 replies): trumps break 3-1

No consolation for you but at least the Robot knows the Principle of Fast Arrival - not!

Yes, I agree. LTC is so yesterday. Works some of the time but too many hands where you count yourself out of a game contract, in my opinion.

Partner's opened in 3rd vulnerable, and he's reopened with a X so he ain't going to be weak, but you have to trust him that he knows you will be. 2♠ is my bid. Passing 2♦ with poor trumps and a poor hand doesn't look like the winning option in my opinion.

http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/77278-now-theres-a-challenge/ This is the English auction. I will try to find the Grue-Moss auction and post it. And here it is. Good ol' BBO archive :) (Doesn't cut and paste well so need to do it manually) Go BBO's "Vugraph Schedule" Click "Archive of Older Vugraph Matches" Find "2017-08-26 VG1 BB-F8 France USA2" click result and view bidding by "Next"

I have spent years compiling a complete Precision System based on the original by CC Wei. Hooray :) +1 As a former Wei Precision player myself I congratulate you, Bermy. I actually believe that Wei Precision is one of the easiest systems for beginners to learn. I used a multi 2♦ with Precision back in the late 1970s and 1980s myself. I like the idea of 1♦ being semi-nebulous, and a possible 11-12 1NT rebid. The modifications to Precision by Benito Garozzo, Alan Sontag and others proved that Precision is still a potent system, highlighted by Meckwell's past and continuing successes using it. I wish you all the best using your version of it. Good luck.