biggerclub

So playing with GIB we are forced to keep the auction open with 4HCP? Or even a good 3? I realize that whatever the cut-off there will be a borderline hand. 22 seems a better cutoff than 23 to me. Given the typical Responder structure.

I was just going to suggest a fit-showing jump. (I believe that is what is programmed into GIB here) I think that takes OP too far afield from a natural system with a casual partner . . . so I just don't think there is a solution to the problem. Opener definitely should not pass 2♣ with any 12 point hand.

We should change the name of the game to WMPDW ("what my partner did wrong"). Also, I don't believe that the fact that there are multiple other forcing bids available to R, makes any other bid less forcing. PASS is not a bad place to start the analysis of possible bids, holding a stiff in partner's 6-card suit. I spend a fair amount of time at the table wondering, not what a particular bid will mean, but rather what my partner will think it means.

I would bid 3♣ as my default here. Don't have 3 Hearts, Don't have a diamond stop, if previous bid did not promise 5-4 this confirms at least 5-4, if previous bid did promise 5-4 this one does promise at least 5-4.

I got caught on this one and passed . . . something like 1♦, 1♥, 2NT all pass . . . leading to a lecture from my RHO. "If she's got 18-19 and you've got 6 or 7, min. . . . <yawn> . . . ." P considers herself lucky when I put down a K and 2 Js. :P I dunno, maybe he was planning some kind of snake in the grass x. In my book, it is unethically rude to comment on OPPs bidding in their presence unless asked.

This came up at my table once against a strong pair. 1♥, 1N, 2♣, something that resulted in Opener being dummy. The ♥ suit was reasonably strong, but not super strong AJxxx(?). The ♣ were A8 (I believe, Ax for sure). Opener claimed he would have preferred 2♥ with stronger ♥ or (much) weaker ♣ (xx). I don't believe that the ♣ bid was alerted. It should be alerted if it can be 2 or less. IMO. Should be 3 but might be 2 with no alert is not satisfying. Much like my partners who insist (playing 2/1) on checking 4+ for expected ♦ length. No . . . we regularly and systematically open 1♦ on 4-4-3-2.

Well, I don't think you can run unless you have some kind of SOS system and probably not even then. One hand does not a system make. But how much nicer if the auction goes, 1♠ 2♠ all pass or X or whatever OPPs want to do over that.

You are all correct.

Your OP is far from clear on a grammar basis . . . Partner [does . . . ] when W [does . . . ] and calls the director. Not clear to me, at least, who is the implied subject in the final clause.

This may be masterminding, but I feel like I am very close to a 3s call on the first round with your hand. With both opponents making weak bids, I want P to know that I have a definite preference as to strain . . . my cards are working. The small clubs are troubling (I wish at least one were a diamond). But I think I am coming in.

This depends on your double showing at least something in all unbids, though. "I prefer ♥ partner, but if you really hate them, I can stand the black suits." Right?

Deleted as too trite to leave up.

[edited to deleted confused reference to West calling the Director -- clarified and edited in OP] 1) No. Law 43(A)(1)©. 2) Same question, isn't it? In any event, same answer. 3) This seems like an active ethics question, but I don't see anything in the Laws that specifically bans declarer from asking a question. Not sure about whether there is a general law that could apply here. Note that Law 43 does provide some specific penalties for specific dummy violations, but does not provide a specific penalty for this particular violation. 4) It's possible. 5) I think that any player with a complaint can file a Player Memo. It is up to the Recorder whether to take the next step. In my experience, these dummy participation situations are given quite a bit of leeway.

I took the question to be about the bidding than the play. I can see Monaco stretching for a swing at that point. And Schwartz knowing that for bidding on with a very close hand (at worst). If you knew that partner had zero Q's, it would be an easy stop.

You have to re-open. I choose x, and hope that P has at least 5♥ or even better, 5♦. We will not get too high, because in my partnerships I would reopen without the K♦. My regular partners know that I almost always re-open in this setting and that I don't always have perfect shape.

This was in a recent Bridge World Master Solver's Club problem. The expert view was well over 85% that new suits by Responder are unqualifiedly forcing.

Pass.

Sometimes a good to great slam goes down? Board 57. Everyone seemed a bit in too much of a hurry to get to 7 on Board 61, but without some agreed upon Q ask that is going to come up about once every 10 years or so, hard to avoid.

Play 4 card majors/canape.

I am happy to pass and proud of my dummy on this auction. If P goes down it's not because I am deficient. You are not going to be any better off in your suits with cards stacked behind you.

1) When your partner opens a weak 2 at fav vulnerability, raise to 4 immediately with 4 card trump support. -100 (4Sx) vs. +650 (5H). (Suits may have been switched. This is from the round of 16.) 2) When you put your OPPs to a guess by raising a 2S bid to 4S, let them play in 6C (key swing on board 62 (I think)) and don't guess again with 6S. 3) Sometimes, less science is better, making the defense more difficult. In one room auction is P P 1S P 2C (Rev Drury) P 2H P 2S P 4S. In other room, opener knows he is going to 4S and goes there without delay P P 1S P 2C (Rev Drury) P 4S. On the second auction, defense does not realize how critical it is to make a dangerous diamond switch to set up a trick. This is likely the board that sealed the match. 4) 5-4-4-0 is not as strong as it seems (KQT9x, AKxx, AKxx, -). Especially when partner responds with 2/1 GF in your void. Some kind of gadget to ask for Qs right away would be nice. 5) Even world-class players make really silly mistakes sometimes. Like playing to drop the QJ7 doubleton. (which obviously can never happen) I wish I could find a super serious partner on the West Coast who wants to play in national class events. Forcing club, 4 card MAJ, canape.

I play 3♦ (or any other bid, but particularly 3♦) as forcing here. Bidding anything forces to 3NT. I should say that not all my partners do. But, and I rarely say this or act like this, they are wrong. The only way to get out below 3NT is to pass 2NT. In particular a weak, distributional hand with ♦ (such as you hypothesize) will make an initial response of 3♦. With GIB's hand, I would likely call 3♣.

They are playing UDCA and wondering why you keep switching? :o :o :P

5♣ is very good if, as seems likely, the auction continues. Partner will draw the correct inference after 5♠.

At the table, I would probably bid 4♠. In a bidding contest I want to get to a VUL slam. But there are so many cards out and no way to know who has which of them. Why should P have all the A's and K's and not OPPs? If I had a NON-CUE 5♦ bid . . . which may be more useful than CUE BIDS in this kind of situation . . . .