The_Badger

Now that made me smile, Barry :)

Rule #1 Stop bidding as soon as possible with a misfit. Rule #2 This applies to pre-empts, too. Yes, partner could have the perfect hand for 4♠, 5♦ or 3NT to make but given how flaky 3 level minor suit pre-empts are these days, it's a reluctant pass from me too.

The Polish Club system does go some way to having stronger major-suited hands opened on 17HCPs maximum, whilst stronger hands are opened 1♣, but then again the 1♣ bid is two-sided used for a weaker hand too. Whilst the major suit opening isn't unlimited, it does mark an advance from the Blue Club norm of 16 maximum and a 4 card suit, with canapé; and the Precision norm of 15 maximum with a five card major. The system infrastructure of Fantunes is truly unique, and the thinking behind it revolutionary, but given the success of Polish Club I am sure there is a way of using a strong 1♣ system without the weak hand option, and incorporating semi-unlimited majors into the mix, perhaps upping the major suit bids to 19 maximum.

Bidding is all about making space to describe hands. Acol may be a neat system, but some of the ideas it promotes have been well and truly superseded with a move towards five card major-based systems, such as 2/1. If you add a Jacoby 2NT into your artillery, then you will have to tweak what the former bids for Delayed Game Raises mean. That in itself may have to be covered by Laws and Rulings, I assume. The principle idea of bidding constructively is that a bid is uniquely descriptive (within certain parameters) and no other bid can duplicate its meaning. In essence, every bid has its own meaning to show a certain type of hand. Therefore, what you say about DGRs and a Jacoby 2NT bid prove that duplication will take place.

I'm really glad you have posted this hand as it is a classic. A Moysian slam. World class bidding from two world class players. 3-3 trump split 36% + 4-2 split 48% = 84% or thereabouts grand slam. Great odds! (Though I have a lot of sympathy for all those pairs that played in the unmakeable 7♠ too.)

Sad times :( Though I personally don't agree with your sentiment If BBO don't have the resources to fix GIB, please please please open it up to more people. If a restaurant had a poor hygiene rating would you encourage people to go there? Whilst GIB should be allowed occasional errors, when they are fundamental errors like the two shown (and why should we Ignore the normal 'idiotic' GIB plays, like ducking the first club?) then I totally agree with your opinion GIB is broken.

Welcome to the forum, sfmoorex :) Would (a human bid as opposed to a robot) 3♠ instead of 4NT after an opponent's Michaels be interpreted as a void/singleton with support for ♦s? It all depends if an opening 1 bid guarantees 4+ ♦s. The problem with that is if partner is 4432, you'll find difficulty reaching a ♣ slam without partner pulling to ♦s. Anyway, always nice to get one over the robots. 7♦ missing 3 aces and a 4-0 trump split making. That's a first.

The only logical explanation is 1♦ is forcing and West doesn't have to bid on the first round. It's a hideous decision, but West might have bid 4♥ on the first round of the auction, and the auction probably would have concluded there, so I don't see any reason to bid on or double at match points. Keep it simple. As to whether partner's pass is forcing in this type of auction, I'll let better players than me decide.

It isn't an unusual system, but an unusual way of playing vulnerability. As you say 'You can't argue with success!' What interests me is the thinking behind it. Their Precision openings non-vulnerable were certainly aggressive. I remember one hand where 1♠ was opened in 1st or 2nd position with something like - the 5332 distribution is correct - ♠8xxxx ♥Ax ♦Qxx ♣Axx. And even given that it is advertised as a point range of 10-15, I believe many players would downgrade a balanced hand with a such a lousy suit. Even given their methods, I remember one long relay sequence where they missed a 6♥ slam with a 10 card fit where lesser players would automatically end up in slam, so there's still room for improvement I say tongue firmly in my cheek :)

Totally agree, Ken. I'm getting complacent as I now assume everyone, even at I/A level plays in the Walsh-style, preferring to respond with a four card major as opposed a five card ♦ suit.

Well done the USA2 team for winning the Bermuda Bowl, and commiserations to the French team in a superb and exciting match. BBO's vugraph coverage throughout the tournament has been excellent too. There were nearly 9000 spectators watching the latter stages of the final. As David Bird said "A BBO record".

That one sentence is worth its weight in gold. Although I'm definitely inclined to pass without any definition of its meaning. Going off at a tangent, given that minor suits are poor cousins to their majors, what is the point of having a support double in this sequence btw? A double here is better used, as Mike says, to show extras (16+) in my view too.

I had high hopes that the English team could win the Venice Cup this year, but I was really impressed how the Chinese team played. Well done China! I believe it is only a matter of time before the Chinese Mens' Team will become serious contenders - making the top 3 - in the Bermuda Bowl. Perhaps even winning it. I have to admit that the Chinese education system is far superior to many Western countries, with many children learning difficult mathematic techniques at a young age. Once China has access to the universal translation of bridge material (books, pamphlets, magazines, etc.) there will be a surge of bridge players in the People's Republic of China. Already we are seeing a new generation of younger bridge players taking up the game in China. I just wish the situation was the same in England.

That 3♠ pre-empt has bounced players out of the right decision many a time, but using the principle of fast arrival in this type of auction where 1♣is strong is dubious at best, in my opinion. Fast arrival is principally used for weak hands with a known fit. Here you don't know if you have a fit, and as steve2005 rightly says, opener could have a big variety of hands for his 16+ opener, and to a lesser degree responder could have quite a selection of different hands for his GF takeout double.

I'm inclined to go for the ruffing finesse opposed to a straight hook because if it fails you lose one of your entries to dummy and the danger hand East can lead through your hand next.

Yes I do. Rainer mentions it is a mediocre field. Lead partner's ♦ suit with ♠void ♥Jxxxx ♦J ♣Qxxxxxx. No bid available after 1♠ overcall, vulnerable.

Mikeh's pinned post is very interesting +1 but there are so many different types of hands that you can reverse on, and such a range of distributions and HCP counts, that what is needed, I believe, is for the 4th suit to be totally artificial here 1♣ - 1♠ - 2♦ - *2♥* or 1♣ - 1♥ - 2♦ - *2♠* as a relay asking about opener's hand. As I have said many times previously, I'm not a fan of the weaker hand taking control of the auction, but here where opener has promised a semi-specific shape, and a semi-specific point count, responder needs to clarify opener's hand further.

Just having a quick look at the hand, there's a potential problem lurking if West is 4-4-4-1 shape, I believe. So I'm inclined to lead the ♠9 at trick 3 (after capturing the 2nd trick with the ♣A) to cover this eventuality.

Whilst sympathising with what happened on this board, Bermy, another recent post by you on the Discussion Forums was: "I'm so tired of humans. Why I prefer robot bridge." Mmmm.... Wonder if you feel the same way about robots after this bidding nonsense? Though I have to say, in my opinion, the real reason for ending in a hopeless contract on this hand is my bugbear of 2/1: a forcing 1NT response covering a multitude of hands, and a 2♣ rebid by opener that could potentially be a 3 card suit.

Google the search instead with something like "2NT opening minors BBO" or similar. It will provide a list of previous BBO posts on the subject.

Trust me, Tramticket, no snobbish sneering, but I did find Benji/Reverse Benji - when I did play it - unwieldy for quite a few hands, especially strong two suiters. Preferred a general 2♣ opener that isn't game forcing, but could stop in 3M/4m if needs be (as per original SAYC), with a multi, etc. I also agree the other problem with Benji is the 2♦ bid when you hold a ♥ suit. What interests me is StevenG's post that non (EBU)-affiliated clubs are thriving in some areas. If we go down the road of making bridge unattractive to the masses, by more rules and regulations that may intimidate and alienate players, it ultimately becomes less of a social game or hobby - which bridge is to many - and more of a game for purists. I admit it is very difficult juggling the needs of amateur and professional players under one set of rules, but I do believe at club level they should keep things as simple as they possibly can: tournament play is completely different. Let's face it, many players do break the rules unintentionally, for example, overvaluing hands for strong 2-level bids, mainly I believe as they are scarce and players get carried away a bit when they have, in their opinion, a strong-looking hand, but not strong in the way that experts define it. Throwing an over-complicated rule book at an average player every time will just put them off the game, in my opinion.

I've never liked Benji. Haven't played it since the old king died. Tutankhamun :)

I get tired of humans, too, and not just in the bridge world, but if you persevere on BBO you will make friends and find players that want to play the game in a respectful manner. You just have to separate the 'wheat from the chaff' as proverbs go. I looked at your BBO profile and see that you are on the same time zone as me. Whilst I play rarely on BBO, and only with a small group of good friends these days, I did find that it was generally better to play late at night and in the early morning in a pick-up game when the majority of North American players come online. First there are no language barriers whatsoever, and whilst many Europeans and other nationalities speak and write English adequately, communicating ideas in the bridge world can sometimes be fraught with difficulty. Secondly, you are less likely to encounter specific systems geared to one country, such as Acol, SEF or Polish Club etc., and whilst most players who play these systems can adapt to playing other systems, mapping these out before a game begins can be both time consuming and problematic. Thirdly, as a country the USA has the greatest number of bridge players, so you have more choice; moreover some players only play at weekends, on certain days, etc. so it's good to vary the days and times when you play and see what comes of that too. And fourthly, at the risk of sounding sexist, I do find as a male myself that female bridge players generally are far more respectful. There's a far bit of testosterone bubbling under the surface with some of the male players that sometimes spills online in the form of abuse. Totally unnecessary in my opinion.

Yes, I agree that Daniels remarks are clichéd at best comparing Confederate Statues to movie posters. But many of these statues were erected in the late 1800s/early 1900s and are part of the history of the USA. As a traditional left-wing Labour (Democrat) voter myself, I would definitely veto any attempt to erect any divisive symbolism such as Confederate Statues in this day and age. However, given that the USA has participated in numerous wars around the world, some very divisive, killing millions of ordinary people, shouldn't the Statue of Liberty be dismantled too?

Charlie Daniels: Confederate Statue Removal Is Like 'What Isis Is Doing' "There were pieces of history that they didn't like, they were taking them down," says the country and Southern rock veteran. As Daniels sees it, the answer isn't in removing Civil War statues of Lee, Jackson and the like, but simply turning away. "If you don't like it, don't look at it," he says. "I walk past movie posters I don't like … there's all kinds of symbolism in this country that I don't like, but I'm not going to go tear them down. I just don't look at them … These statues aren't preaching or shouting out some kind of crazy epithets or something. They're just sitting there. Just turn around and don't look at them." Daniels remains one of country music's most politically vocal figures. "Wonder if any of the radicals fomenting chaos would consider marching to save the lives of the millions of unborn that are murdered each year," he tweeted today, along with his regular tweets about the terror attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya. "Benghazi ain't going away!" he wrote. My view: Rewriting history by burying it or destroying it does us no favours at all. Even if I agree that what the Confederate States stood for was morally wrong.