MickyB

I would - in fact I can't imagine passing on this sequence holding xxxxx in spades and a few outside values.

Hmm, you mean I shouldn't have volunteered to be vugraph operator for the first time for all 128 boards of the upcoming England vs Netherlands friendly? :rolleyes:

Indeed. Bidding "destructively" at the 2 level over a 1NT opener is just pointless, unless opps don't play leb/rubensohl you will achieve nothing. Bids have to be aimed at stealing the part-score.

Isn't the other US team in the BB Nickell? Would be surprised to see Welland in the semis!

I know little of Kelsey's book, but I understand that Woolsey's Matchpoints is the book to read on this topic - I found it to be excellent.

Danish has playbacks, Swiss doesn't. Which is superior depends upon the number of pairs and the number of rounds. Some use compromise solutions - say Swiss until the final two rounds, then Danish.

I've probably used the word "cool" about twelve times tonight. I propose the alternative title "Cool Bridge" :angry:

He did make that post nearly a month ago...he was a little way behind, but not *quite* that far!

Indeed...the system is nowhere near being ACBL legal. I think there are quite a few benefits to keeping the club single suiter out of 1S anyway.

Agree with all that David. The mini NT being preemptive instead of constructive is a reason to make it off-shape; The reason not to is that frequently you are in a part-score battle and you succeed only in preempting yourself out of your major suit fit.

David - Paul chose to use these 2M openings after reading Karl Schneider's post on RGB: "My simulation work has shown that opening 11-12 5M332 with 1N is clearly inferior to opening 1M. When partner has less than 10 points, even a 5-2 fit in the major and playing 2M is superior to playing 1N. A 10-12 point notrump should not be considered a "constructive" bid [i play it myself] but rather a pre-emptive bid. As such, your hand should be reasonably "constrained" shapewise and not contain a 5card major. This allows your partner the ability to best find a "safe" resting spot and focus on his own 4 and 5-card suits. Any time your combined holdings are 21 points or less, it is generally preferable to play at 2M instead of in 1N with a 5-2 fit or better. By "hiding" your 5card major within mini 1N opening, your are destined to play an inferior MP contract." I wasn't persuaded :rolleyes: The 4M6m issue seems to be one of partscore versus game. Opening the major can lead you to the wrong part-score, opening the minor can miss your game in the major fit. Please note that if the 1M opener is either 4 or 6 cards, you can get away with making 3 card raises less frequently, meaning that you are less likely to reach the wrong part-score on these hands B)

Whereagles - I suspect that a 2♦ opener is a mini-multi, but I may be wrong. Helene - 1♣:1♦ is a bit susceptible to interference, but it has to be sound - if you go jumping around just because you've got a 5 card suit (as you might if the strong club had been opened on your right) then the forcing pass will clobber you. The page 8 auction looks correct if the 2♦ bid had been 2♣, so I'm fairly sure it is a misprint.

I don't know whether Stayman then 4♣ should be a splinter or a cue, but it isn't Gerber!

Lol, nicely put Richard...I'll concur by saying that I'm not convinced by the soundness of opening that light, particularly using unlimited openings, particularly playing 2/1! BTW, there was a separate option for "yes, and even if Q♦ had been J♦"

What Luis said.

Given your length in the suits, I think partner's most likely shape is 2344...

CS - I think you missed the top of the poll. We are voting for the meaning of 1♠-(P)-3♣.

Thanks for your work Elianna, and wd Fly!

What option do we go for if we just want to bid 2♦? :D

No idea what he thought it was, but after bidding 5♣ his LHO doubled and this was passed out!

AKQJxx J8xxx Q x When I was given this hand, my instinct was to rebid 2♥. I've now realised that I have no idea what to bid over a 2♠ rebid from partner, so I may have to reconsider B) It has been suggested to me that 4♥ is a better bid than 3♥ because it is weaker than 3♥ rebidding 4♥, but opposite 2-3 in the majors we will land up in hearts when spades looks more promising. This hand occured in the Spring Fours, and was a source of contention between a friend and his partner when 4♥ went one off. FWIW, Zia said that the choice between 2♥ and 3♥ is a matter of style!

I'd sooner double than bid 2NT

TOSR isn't bad either...but it doesn't have to be an acronym, Nightmare is pretty cool too...even if you actually play the similar Millennium Club, you can still call it Nightmare B) If you find exotic systems interesting then have a look around, see what you fancy and give it a go if you can find a like-minded partner. WJ2005 isn't a bad starting point - a sound system and very well documented. MOSCITO, Precision or something like the Italians play could work too. Stick to SAYC or 2/1 if you aren't too bothered by system. If you aren't worrying about system you can concentrate on cardplay, and if you are playing something common then you will find it easier to learn judgement from others.

Lol, this hand appeared as dummy just after I read your post! My opp bid 1♠...I pass :(

Maybe you pass 2H on that. I know better to bid 2S. Well I know even better to pass :P Do you really think the good games you reach will make up for the part-scores you go down in? Plus sometimes you will reach a bad game after this false preference, particularly if partner plays you to have a true false preference :angry: Having said that, I've seen players I respect advocate this sort of action before...