Gilithin

My line was the same as yours - that's why I am sure there is more to it!

If you reach that point and do not know whether you want to be in 3NT, you probably should have made a relay break to find out on the previous round. If the relay system does not allow such breaks, get a better system.

There must be more to it than this for it to be the subject of a lamford post...

The simplest way of playing is for the cue to show support directly after an overcall, or directly in response to an overcall, but is a general force asking for more information at any other time. This is not perfect - see other posts for more granularity if you wish - but it works well enough for >95% of pairs. The Opener's UCB in the linked article is more unusual. You can play that way if you wish but I do not see much advantage to it.

There is so much ignorance (and possible conspiracy) within your OP, I would barely know where to start. I might humbly suggest you first educate yourself about the subject matter you are covering to allow for a serious debate to follow.

Out of interest, did he ever pay out 5 million dollars for raping a woman? I hear that's what all the cool golfers are doing this year. It seems to me that US politicians like those that give them money and dislike those that run against them. It's more or less the American dream transposed to a social life.

Indeed! This is perhaps a good moment to ask the OP what he thinks a Double actually means here.

Lawyer: And you say it - again this has become very famous in this video - "I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything." That's what you said, correct? Trump: Well historically that's true with stars. Lawyer: True with stars that they can grab women by the pussy? Trump: Well that's what it's...if you look over the last million years I guess that's been largely true.. Not always but largely true. Unfortunately or fortunately. Lawyer: You consider yourself to be a star? Trump: I think you can say that, yeah. Could someone please explain how truly devout white Christians manage to rationalise this as the ideal morals for the highest office in the USA? It's genuinely very difficult for people outside of America to understand.

My experience of shape-showing relays was a significant advantage over natural but a level of commitment to memorisation above what most club players are willing to do, particularly when it comes to the scans above the actual shape relays.

Just a small extra tip here. How you play your honours can also be a signal. Here you should play the ace first, then the king and jack to provide a stronger signal for hearts. This sort of subtle extra granularity is a little more relevant in the classic case, where you want to give partner an extra ruff and distinguishing between a fast entry and just a general preference is more critical, but it is good to get into the habit of doing these things, not least of which because it encourages your partner to look for them, which is often half the battle for teaching new players.

If you do not want to handle table money, make playing free for members and raise the base membership costs by the equivalent amount. Not only does it work out the same financially but it encourages the members to play more. You still have to issue of table money for guests though, so depending on your club's make-up that may or may not be a useful change.

The given situation seems to be far closer to a mixed Multi-2♦ opener that will only be passed if Responder has a completely bust hand with very long diamonds than to a 1NT opener.

This is what the Laws say but it is not what you report as your RA's regulations: There is no wiggle room provided here for accidentally opening a traveller due to someone else being at fault or for the TD to apply judgement. If the above is not the regulation, then you should probably correct it to tell us what it really is.

This is illegal as it depends on the circumstances. If a previous pair has put the travellers back into the wrong boards, there is no reason to penalise a subsequent pair that opened the wrong traveller without fault. If this happened to me, I would refuse to enter any score thereafter and call the TD every hand to check the traveller for score entry, at least until some sort of sense prevailed.

That should have been 2♣ not a Weak 2. I would hope your 2♣ openers can have 3 key cards.

In most auctions that works but if, for example, we open 2 and Responder ends up doing the asking, I am not convinced it is good bridge to continue after the sign-off on 3 key cards. But naturally YMMV.

What are you opening with:- All balanced hands 0-7 any 15+ with club length 0-9 without club length 10-13 without club or spade length 22+ with both minors All hands with heart length Presumably the undisclosed 1♣ will cover some of these but it is in compatible with most of them. It does look a lot like your iterative process got stuck in a local maximum rather than having a broad enough basis to find an optimal maximum. This is a common issue for such schemes.

They bid 2♠, since the bottom end of a 2/1 in Modern Acol puts the hand close enough to invitational range to make this workable. If you do not like this, as mentioned in my previous post, you have to go for 2♥ followed by 3♠. It helps in this case to be playing 4SF GF rather than the more traditional (for Acol) INV+.

That depends on how old your Acol is. In Stone Age Acol, a 2♠ rebid is about 8-10 (might be only 2 spades) and 3♠ is invitational. In Modern Acol, 3♠ is indeed usually played as game forcing but even here some play it as a 3 card invitational raise, with 2♠ more often being 2. Modern Acol also offers you 2♥ followed by 3♠ to show slam interest. If North bids 2♠ at their third turn over 2♥, Stone Agers will typically play 3♠ as invitational, meaning there is essentially no easy way of making a slam try below game. Yes, Acol is in many ways a backwards system.

RKCB is by definition only used when there is suit agreement and this is one of the more important aspects for club/social players to get sorted out when moving over to it. If we are looking for a NT slam, it is usual not to use any check for aces/kings at all. If we have the traditional 33hcp then we are not missing 2 aces; and if we have 37 for a grand then we are not missing any ace at all. The original use of Gerber (other than for Mr Gerber himself) was less about avoiding a NT slam missing 2 aces and more about having a convenient way of bidding very strong one-suiters. When Jacoby Transfers and advanced follow-ups to them became established, the number of hands where Gerber became a key factor diminished to the point that almost no strong pairs were using it regularly. There are of course many pairs that use 4♣ after suit agreement as RKCB (Baze) though. For hands without a long suit after a NT opening, either using Stayman, some version of Baron or bidding some number of NT is typically a good way of proceeding. There is no need to leap directly to asking about the number of aces.

So ♠xxx ♥KQx ♦AQJx ♣KQx. What's wrong with 2♦? Or since pure takeout doubles are often combined with a general cue rather than a UCB, 2♠ might also be an option. This sort of description is at best rubbish and at worst ethically challenged. A description such as "convertible values" is just fine, but "pure penalty"? Really? I suggest you provide us with a set of agreements that work perfectly for this hand but fail on most others and bid accordingly.

A regular partner and I take notes during a session and then go through the hands afterwards. Over time, this has a noticeable and significant effect, particularly if the better player is could at keeping the focus on the more important aspects of improvement at each stage of development. The benefit of such analysis is somewhat dependant on the willingness of the players to accept ideas and advice though. If you are doing this analysis and not improving, you probably need to work out whether one or both or the players in the partnership is unable to accept their inaccuracies and learn from them. Some players are unfortunately just not worth the time and effort to teach.

I evaluate it as wrong. Most of the world play the first double as negative, showing hearts, these days, although takeout can be played. But the second double is certainly not penalty and will typical just be value-showing. Opener should take an appropriate action in this context.

The biggest clue would be your NT range and invite style.