MickyB

Yup, 4.1.9 is great. I'm not sure whether I should be posting this in the TD forum or in suggestions for the software, so I shall randomly add it onto this thread... I've recently started TDing, and was shocked at the number of disconnects there were. I'm guessing there were at least 40 subs used in an 8 board tourney that started with 100 players, and it wasn't like the tourney had ground to a halt or anything. There doesn't seem to be any easy way of blacklisting the players who have disconnected - I would have to right click on my name, open up friends/enemies, work out how to spell their name...and by the time I've done that, three more people have disconnected! So - is there an easier way of doing it, and if not would it be possible for a future version to allow you to set the status of a player who has disconnected by right clicking on his name?

You nearly had me with that April Fools joke Roland... If, for some unknown reason, you wish to play Flannery, it has to be better to play Flannery 2♥ and a mini-multi.

Oh for this to be true :rolleyes: giving you any ideas Richard? B)

Alternatively, someone can agree with you if you are right - stop is not a call.

Sorry, this makes little/no sense to me. Regardless of the range of your NT, a 1NT rebid should show a balanced hand, while deny appropriate strength for a 1NT opening or sufficient strength for a 2NT rebid. I don't see why this logical should change because you happening to be playing a 12-14 or a 15-17 NT... Care to elaborate your reasoning? I seem to remember Chip Martel implied this in a post on RGB. If you bid two suits on a weak NT, then you can pass most things that pard bids next, satisfied that you aren't missing game. If you bid two suits on a strong NT, then you haven't really got your hand across, and if partner bids something weakish (1NT, 2♣, 2♥) you are still worried about missing game. On the other hand, you are happier after a 2NT rebid from pard if you have 14+ than 12-13. I hadn't considered this 'til just now...

Josh's defence looks excellent Richard, and yes, Ben's responses go for simplicity.

Playing weak NT, you have to rebid 1NT on balanced hands without major suit support to get across the extra strength. Playing strong NT, this reason doesn't apply - it is clear to rebid 1NT on 4333 IMO, but it is playable to bid 1♠ or 1NT on 4(23)4s.

IMO two suited preempts with both suits known and two suited preempts with only one suit known should be treated differently - ie five sets in all.

Ekren 2♥ is superior to Ekren 2♦ because it puts more pressure on the defence - you can pass out 2♥ much more often. Also many don't want to give up their weak twos, so combine it with a multi.

Dutch/Lucas should just be treated as natural IMO. Although I guess there is slightly more reason to be playing X as power and 2N as t/o than over a 6 card weak two. Ekren is indeed the toughest one. Hows this...X = power, 2♠ = a minor (now 2N = weak or strong, 3♣/3♦ = intermediate pass or correct) 2N = minors (weak or strong), 3♣ = minors (intermediate), 3♦ = 5♦5major, 3M = natural, big hand, strong 6 card suit

Partner will be able to tell 99%+ of the time - if he has A, K or Q in his hand then he knows it is zero, if he doesn't he will usually be able to tell from knowing partner's overall strength There is a story on these forums that partner had shown 0 or 3 twice, and it was obviously AKQ in one and xxx in the other. Relayer had xxx in one, and void in the other, and was on a complete guess - until an opp ventured a lead directing double!

I agree nick - but I understand that the Partnership Bidding PDF is legal.

Interesting. How many people do you reckon fall into this bracket in the US? In the UK I understand there are maybe 4 such players!

Because we believe that it will get you to a worse 3m contract more often than it will get you to a better 3m contract, and that it could be important to have 2♠ played from our side.

Just cos I would obviously bid at the table doesn't stop me from arguing that bidding is wrong :D Anyway, I think what you meant to say was "Mike, you'd bid on this in tempo, and on plenty of hands with less points but compensating shape" :D I don't actually know what I would do on this hand when vul. Pass or 2♠ - not double. Wouldn't even consider it. Ron said he would prefer to have three hearts; Yes, the hand would probably play better if I had the heart length, but then I could pass and wait to see if pard could balance. I think those that argue that it is clear to bid at MPs and less clear at IMPs are wrong - vul at MPs I'm worried about being clipped for 200, or my bid could tell the opps how to make 3♥ tick instead of 2♥ tick.

I'd go the same way as you Ben, but your reasons hadn't occured to me. If opps are vul, then we are doing better if 2♥ goes down than if they are NV, therefore there is greater incentive to bid when opps are NV. The typical case for this is deciding whether to bid a minor over opps 1NT at MPs. If opps are vul, we might be trading +100 for +90, or +200 for a partscore. If opps are NV, bidding is more likely to work out.

Hey Fred In response to your comparisons between plan A and plan B... 2) I imagine it would still be a pain to get several friends to meet up on the same BBO. 5) Presumably it wouldn't be possible to chat to someone on a different BBO? In that case, if I want to talk to several different people I would need to get them to move to the same BBO. Regarding the 'view' list - I doubt many are interested in filtering friends, yellows or to a lesser extent stars; Could we have the country and skill filters just applying to neutrals? IMO The only question is whether selecting 'experts' and 'US' should show all experts and all Americans, or just US experts. A box to swap between the two shouldn't add too much complexity. While I'm not sure about the idea of a "BBO hell", it might be worth splitting those that tend to form friendships from those who play with randoms. In particular, could Hrothgar's "Permanent Floating Indy" be accessible from the one and only BBO, but joining it seamlessly move you to a new server? Manually run tournaments and team matches could move you onto another server. Like Hrothgar, I would rather that premium events are paid for individually. It is difficult to know what to suggest without a greater understanding of how things would be different under this plan. Many seem to think that keeping the list of people online updated is the problem, but if that is so then I don't understand how the mini BBO plan would help without depriving you of the list of your online friends on other servers.

Double looks clearcut to me too. You will be slightly nervous if pard passes, but at least you have AQ AQ for him.

Presumably the same thing as opener would do with 4♥ and a minimum hand after the natural auction 1m - 1♠! Jansma-Verhees played 1m:2♥ as flannery in Malmo. Nothing on their card about openers rebid after 1m:1M that I can see. They probably couldn't play full transfer responses to 1♣ because it is Polish. I guess the inversion should show a small advantage. It will place the stronger hand as declarer more frequently, and at the 1 level it is less safe to show a suit by doubling than by bidding.

IIRC the worlds were broadcast in the UK in 6 one-hour TV programmes. They are now available on DVD.

They had TV in 1974? Wow, never knew that. But yes, I agree with Hrothgar. Seeing the players would grow tiresome after about 5 minutes.

4♠. Much more likely to go down at the 5 or 6 level than to find the perfect hand opposite for slam.

How do you bid when you have 6 spades and you are open to playing in NT or possibly another suit?

Sure, you can decide to treat the 6 card suit as being only 5, but that will cause a bad result on a different set of hands for opener. Obviously I believe that the merits of the structure outweigh these losses, otherwise I wouldn't play it! Presumably people playing IJS play a jump rebid forcing, as we do, so the only difference is reversing the bidding of the intermediate hands and the weak hands. I suspect that WJS is the better method at the 2 level - the 'problem hands' that I mentioned for WJS exist for IJS as well, but they are more likely to cost due to the increased probability of game being on for our side. WJS also preempt when it is most likely that game will be on for the opps. Against that, if opps obstruct the auction after you have responded at the 1 level, you are happier not bidding again if you are weak than if you are intermediate. IJS come into their own when opener could have a weak NT and a 1NT response would be NF, because 3NT could well depend on whether partner has a fitting honour.

I play your WJS structure as well, but it isn't without problems - you have to make WJS on some fairly nasty hands (3 card support for partner's minor, 4 cards in the other major, awful suit etc). SJS can help your bidding on hands that can be worth a lot of IMPs.