MickyB

1S as North is auto

FYP

Everything is just standard after 2C-P-2D. You can play Kokish if you wish. I played the 2C opener for a while and wasn't that keen, I seemed very bad at guessing which handtype partner had. Maybe I needed to watch him count his points. I play 2M as about 9-12. 1st NV it is more like 8-12 [as all sorts of rubbish gets opened a multi 1st NV]. There's a slight issue with 4S6H and around 10 points, if you bid 1H:1N, 2H then partner will expect a better hand. I think many play something that allows them to show this hand over the 2N (or 2S) enquiry, I heard somewhere it was Zia's method, try looking at his convention card. Likewise defensive hands with a poor suit aren't ecstatic about having to preempt vulnerable. Overall it works well though.

I am very happy with my Samsung Galaxy S ii, which is generally considered to be the best phone available, but I don't claim to have much experience with non-Android alternatives. I believe it is to be released in the US during August.

Pard's 2NT on the first hand is just bonkers, and 3NT on the second isn't much better. 1N-X-XX also needs discussion, both for natural and ART redouble. If the redouble is natural and you run to 2C without clubs, oppo are more likely to double you and give you another shot. On the other hand, it would seem reasonable to play pass there as neutral, expecting partner to run unless he has a hand that even TylerE would have doubled with. If the redouble is some sort of scramble, direct bids show both weakness and length - it cannot be right to be taking another action here on a balanced nothing. This means pard can't rely on you having values when he makes a penalty double [or penalty pass, if you prefer] of 2m, but you are at least protected by the knowledge that oppo didn't stick 1NT X, so you probably have the balance of points anyway.

I've always played pulling as showing a five-card suit. At favourable, it would be reasonable to play 2C as a natural or scramble, as 1N X up two is much worse than 2C off five; but otherwise, running on a hand with no five-card suit removes the chance of us obtaining a very good result on the board, without decreasing the chance of a bad result. If 1N-X-P is "to play", then why are you worrying about them running? People sometimes do run here, but it shouldn't be frequent. If 1N-X-P forces a redouble, then you can pass and pull on the next round, which implies you have another place to play. Either way, I suggest playing that pass is forcing over 2m but not higher.

Downvote

This was, bizarrely, true in WJ05, but IIRC WJ10 has reverted to this showing 7-10 or so.

I consider it obvious that, if "second order UI" were allowed, it would still never be advantageous to hesitate just so you could take advantage of it. That would have been the case under the old rules on LAs, and it is certainly true under the current, stricter rules. Partner's honesty is fairly irrelevant in all of this. If I hesitate and partner acts, and I expect to get ruled against if he has a marginal hand, I may as well assume he has a clear action and raise to game. The suggestion that we can't choose our action based on the knowledge that we have broken tempo seems ridiculous to me. If we aren't allowed to know that we have hesitated here, does this mean that we also aren't allowed to know that we have hesitated during the play of the cards? This feels like it will create huge problems on defence.

I don't find the comment surprising - if I hadn't read it on these forums, it wouldn't have occurred to me that this might not be permitted.

My recollection of Fred's posts on this topic is that, having played weak NT for a while, he now much prefers strong NT, as it is difficult to sort out the 15-17 balanced hands in competitive auctions having opened a suit. It is perfectly playable to play game-forcing two-over-ones in this structure. 1M:1N, 2C should be rebid on 15-17 balanced, even with a doubleton club, and responder's 2D rebid now should be artificial. Assuming you are opening 1D on some balanced hands with diamond length, a 2C response should merely show the values for game opposite 15-16 balanced. 1D:2C, 2N should show 15-19 balanced, GF.

"Tutti-Frutti" usually refers to 2♦ = ♠+m or ♥, 2♥ = ♥+m or ♠, 2♠ = majors or minors. 2S as a bad preempt in any suit is known as "Terrorist 2♠". I have not heard of anyone playing 2♣ as in the OP so I don't have a name for that one.

I played a Hackett-style [four-card majors, 14-16 NT, 2/1 GF] but with three-card majors in a fairly normal English event, having noted that we were not allowed to use conventions after opening 1M. This was fine until we realised, half-way through the session, that takeout doubles are conventional.

2S = 11, 2N = 12. System on over a 1NT overcall.

2NT implies reasonable hearts. With a marginal heart holding, partner will tend towards 2NT over double when lacking spade length. Bidding here is nuts.

What does the UI suggest? Not a lot. Perhaps that partner thinks that oppo may have done the right thing by bidding 5H over 4S. Alternatively, he wishes to make a penalty double, and wants to draw our attention to the fact that bidding on is anti-percentage, as we are likely to get the score for 4S anyway. I guess if someone did this with a hand that was happy to be defending 5H instead of playing 4S then I would be suspicious that this was a means of waking partner up, however if this is the recommended time to call the TD then you can't assume that was why it was done. As has been said before, the hesitation and impending ruling should dissuade this hand from bidding 5S, so the standards for a "clear 5S bid" have changed somewhat.

If it doesn't occur to him that there may be a ruling on the hand, partner is unlikely to make a SEWOG bid anyway. My calling the TD would be *more* likely to influence partner's bid were it not for the law you mention.

1NT would [should] announce interest in game opposite a passed hand. We don't have that. It also wouldn't get our clubs into the picture. 2C will cause partner to frequently overcompete. If you were suggesting bending the requirement for a six-card suit on x xxx Axxx KQJTx, that would seem perfectly reasonable, but that hand is nothing like this one. 1D may not show our clubs, but now partner can act knowing that we have something, and we can hope to find our fit later. There is a good case for switching to natural, strong NT methods just in third seat, IMO. You could even play four-card majors, now your 1C opening would almost show five cards!

Wtg! Final vs Hughes [one of my favourite authors] on vugraph in 3h45

http://www.cbf.ca/BWeek/11files/BWeek11_CNTAsf.html This says they were six down going into the last quarter, but I think Mike told me he was winning at halftime with doesn't match the website, so who knows.

Depending on how you look at it, you are either almost right or completely wrong :)

At the time of writing, Bathurst are 94 up, it's looking like there won't be an eighth set. Congratulations, Justin+co - you haven't just won the trials, you've obliterated some world class opposition over very long matches. I am looking forward to following you in Veldhoven. Edit: This was premature, Diamond are playing on 81 down. I shan't delete my post...although if it gets to within 25 I may reconsider this position :P

FYP

Board number/link pls? Or just a vague hint which set to look in would do!