MickyB

Perhaps your partner has heard you misuse the word "transfer" before? I gave the exact explanation to a player less experienced than any at the Tolle, who had never played the method. "I hope this isnt a trick question because I'll guess spades" [i suggest it might show hearts] "You used the word transfer"

While "asks me to bid the suit below my major" is a strictly superior explanation, the one given at the table was correct, and it seems harsh to rule against a pair because their opposition don't understand English. If someone told me I was receiving a PP for giving that explanation I would think I was on Candid Camera. "4♣ asks me to transfer to my major" clearly does not mean the same as "4♣ asks me to bid my major". I have been asked to transfer, how is bidding my own suit a transfer? "4♦ is a transfer to my major" must ask me to bid my major - there is no other logical meaning - but that does not make the use of the word "transfer" correct. Indeed, this could similarly be misunderstood as a transfer to responder's own heart suit if you are not careful with your phrasing. I agree with Mamos that the quality of the field in this event is very wide-ranging [this board is evidence of that].

Excellent news - glad a suitable 6th was found to add to team of five from the Premier League! I look forward to cheering you on in March.

Sorry, my fragile ego couldn't cope with too many lists as long as Timo's without my name being mentioned in the thread ;)

Actually, no. Starting with 1NT works well on balanced invites, you can leave room for partner to describe his hand before deciding what strain to invite in. The downside is that you have to arrange for partner to take another call whenever he has a 14-count, which is less of a problem when playing 14-16 NT. The hands that do best playing lighter 2/1s are invitational single-suiters and hands that can show some values but stop in a safe two-level partial [eg 1S:2D, 2H:2S, pass]. BTW, most non-2/1ers play 1H:2m, 2H:2S as GF, so the canapes are kinda irrelevant.

I've never understood the merit in starting with 1NT on 13-15 balanced. Let's say partner bids a minor suit that you hold four cards in. Won't you normally need to find out his residual shape in order to decide whether 3NT is the spot or not? 2m then 2NT on these hands feels perfect to me.

Disagree with the contents of your parentheses. Playing 1M:2m, 2M as F1 is clearly wrong in my opinion, why would you design a system around stopping in 2NT? The hands you really want to 2/1 on are 9-10 with a doubleton in partner's suit so you can split up the 4-10 range for auctions like 1S:1N, 2H:2S. I agree with the assessments on having to bid 1S:2D, 3S with many hands and 1S:2D, 2S:3C as just a way to force; That is why I play 1S:2D, 2NT as GF single-suited and 1S:2D, 2S:2NT as GF [invites bid 1NT then 2NT].

Agree with Fluffy that Fred and Justin are a level above the rest, as they both play and write very well. MikeH, Frances, Gnasher and Phil all post frequently and thoroughly, and are often thought-provoking. Also RHM but his bidding isn't to my taste! I believe [but I'm not certain in all cases - I haven't played against them all] that Mich-B, Fluffy, Han, Cherdano, 655321, DBurn and myself are among the top players here, but we post less frequently and/or less thoroughly than the names mentioned above.

What would you bid over 3S with 1255?

I don't like wide-ranging 1NT rebids, Wank's and Zealand's structures look reasonable to me. If I was playing a nebulous minor that included a 13-15 NT I would open it quite soundly on unbalanced hands [no 11-counts] as partner will play me for 13-15 in competition. If I had a 19-20 2NT rebid, I'd be tempted to play a 2NT opening as 21-23 and 2C:2D, 2N as 24+GF so I don't have to bother with Kokish or the like.

Are you suggesting that 2S should be NF and that opener shouldn't rebid 2S on this? If so, what do you what opener to bid? What do you want opener to bid on a 5S6H GF? 4S6H GF? 1H:1N, 2S is a fairly uncomfortable auction, even if you have agreements on how to show a long minor in a non-forcing manner, you still have 31(54) and (21)55 weak hands to worry about. I used to play 2N here as scrambling, not necessarily weak. The only reason I no longer do so is because I don't play natural rebids over the 1NT response. If I don't have agreements here, I bid 3D and hope partner takes it as NF. I don't see why he would so I expect to finish in game, but who knows, it might make.

Of course, this is just standard, but it doesn't get us to game if partner has 5♠1♥ or xx Axx xxxx xxxx.

I think 2D would be fine if your hand was weaker, but here that course of action risks missing game in either major. If you start with Landy, you are well placed to pass 2S, raise 2H, or bid 3H over 2D knowing that you won't find a singleton heart opposite.

1st fav is obviously when it rates to gain most. IMO it will gain more 1st at love all than 2nd at fav. From a theoretical point of view, playing standard methods, I would only want to play it 1st fav, as I think the impact it has on your other balanced hands is considerable. From a practical point of view, I wouldn't want to have to create and remember a set of agreements purely for when we are 1st fav. In other words, I would only consider playing a mini NT if playing strong club or similar.

2C then pass 2S. Partner could have bid 2D then 2S, we may not have a fit and it's only a NV game.

He should really have given dummy a 5th spade, but then I guess that looks a bit contrived.

It means they shouldn't play prism signals

1Y:2X shouldn't promise a rebid playing weak NT/4cM, you should be able to stop in 2Y. 1S:1NT will be passed by 15-16 balanced => responder can't bid 1NT with a reasonable 9-count => 1S:2D shows 9+ => you'll frequently get too high if responder isn't allowed to pass opener's 2S rebid

I'd open 1NT, this hand is less painful than the same hand with a stiff ♠J. I prefer to play methods that allow me to open 1C and not have a rebid problem.

I assume 1S:2D, 2H would have been NF. In "modern Acol" this is forcing, you basically never see this played as NF in tournament bridge. This is somewhat uncomfortable when you have a 1354 decent 9-count but it's fine otherwise. Agree with playing the 4-4 being wrong here, you have a clue that there may be issues in the heart suit and that you may have pitches for them if you play in another strain, it doesn't need opener to have the stiff AD for that to be true.

What was partner's hand?

:( Thought this would be the case. Oh well, Bermuda Bowl 2015 it is.

I thought 2S was clearcut at the vulnerability, where you will frequently gain a couple of imps for -50 vs -110 or +110 vs +50. If either side was vulnerable, it would be less clear to me, but I would probably still bid. So I was rather surprised to see both Grue and Versace pass in this position! Think it was bd 1 of set 3 of the semi-final.

Form of scoring added. For bonus points, would you act at other vulnerabilities? This hand has [i think] quite an interesting follow-up, but I shan't say any more for now.

Looking like USA2 vs Netherlands tomorrow, with the Netherlands starting an imp up.