arrows

I pass without looking at my cards a second time. If I am not happy with partner leaving the double in, I won't double.

This game is insane, legal methods are banned simply because it's effective. Is there any other game like that? The game is set up in a way that favors destructive methods, and then bunch of XXXXXXXXs try hard to bar those methods. Even that those XXXXXXXXs, on behalf of God, decide destructive methods are not at all healthy for the well-being of all of us, IMHO, it's much easier to just give heavier penalty for doubled undertricks.

In the given vulnerability, I'd probably choose double too. parnter may pass with a dull hand and I 'd be happy. Over 3♠, I 'd seriously consider 3NT with these stuffed soft value and slow cards. suppose, partner had a perfect hand for suit contract but rather poor for notrump. for example: ♠ KQxx ♥ x ♦ Axx ♣ Axxxx 3NT still has a fair chance because RHO probably got no entry to nail you down.

"Expert Game" and "Play these hands with me" by Reese.

I bid 5C because its lower suit and stronger for lead. I didn't see why that would incriminate me, but I said earlier I would accept procedure penalty, no problem. Just want to show how they got to the slam when anyone could clearly read the situation. BTW, 3♥, seems intended as transfer ♠, was never alerted. That's all I have to say.

I had my reason to bid 5C, I showed 2 suiter, whatever partner thought they are, Can't I start to compete from the lowest suit? Not allowed?

Just pass, what's the problem? If I made that double, I wouldn't expect my partner to pull it out.

2♦, let partner make another descriptive bid if possible. Over partner's 2♥, I will try 2NT. To this point, partner should know I have a strong balanced hand a little below game-forcing, definitely with ♥ support.

[hv=n=saq5432hkj9da32c2&w=sjth432dk654cqt43&e=s9876haqt8765d87c&s=skhdqjt9cakj98765]399|300|[/hv] South play 4NT on ♠J lead.

[hv=n=sj92h2dq765cak763&s=sakq543hk763dkc42]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] opponents keep quiet, South play 4S on trump 6 lead, dummy puts 2 and East follows

think about this: People know that insurance companies make money of them, but people keep buying insurance, why? People know that the odds of winning lottery is against them, but people keep buying lotteries, why? Are they all idiots? Typcially in a IMP team game. there are lots of swings that cost much more than 1 imp. Hence the cost of losing 1 imp more neglectable. That's why you should stick to the safe play. mathematically correct doesn't mean it's practically correct. Here, the key point is that most people are risk averse, that's why they pay premium for insurance. The 1 imp is your premium.

seems east has 5 diamonds and west 3. and west probably has the ace of spades. if this is the case, no need to guess queen of hearts. Not sure, but I am going to play as the following: win Ace of heart, trump to hand, ruff diamond and draw all the trumps, on the last trump: ♠ K96 ♥ KJ ♠ Q85 ♥ 7 ♣ 8 West must keep 3 spades, (otherwise dummy pitch ♥J and will drop west's ace doublton in spades), declarer pitches a spade on table, and east get squeezed if he has J and 10 in spades. Suppose east reduces his cards to ♠JT ♥ Qx, declarer can continue with a spade, if west play ace, unblock the king; if west ducks, win the king and cash ♥K before playing the last spade.

I couldn't understand 4♠ either. partner could have bid 4S, 4NT, 5 of a minor, and pass but s/he doubled, and how could one pull this out when one's longest suit only has 5 cards?

Must pray for miracles and get the club running. Ruff the spade, Ace of club, club ruff high, draw 2 round of trumps, diamond to Q, club ruff high. If all went well, play the trump 2 and pitch the diamond loser, hoping East get in and he has only diamonds left.

I couldn't find any other way but playing west having: ♠ Q842 ♥ AKJ ♦ Kxx ♣ QT4 so win the king, take a diamond finesse, diamond A and diamond ruff low, now spade 10, west has to cover, win Ace ruff another diamond, and west gets squeezed on this trick... I can then continue with a winner in the suit that west discards and finish the trump coup.

Thank you for these very wise advice, you may find some perfect comments for your suggestion here: http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=11444&st=0 same match, same opponents...

Suppose south, (the weaker hand) is declarer. I guess it's reasonable to play west having no more than 1 diamond honor. Win Ace, trump to QUEEN, in case west played King from KT doublton, it's over. If west discard as expected, then East most likely has a 1-3-4-5 shape. Now lead a diamond to table, win Ace if west plays a honor, and exit with diamond 10. East gets in, but he could do no more than returning his last trump, then I ruff a diamond, ruff a spade to table, lead last diamond and pitch a club, east gets thrown in. I have 5 trumps, 1 diamond ruff, 2 aces and the club queen, adding up to 9 tricks.

From North point of view, Game value should be confirmed after 2NT, he should not pass 3 spades.

I remember a discussion of how to bid minor 2 suits over major weak 2 in this forums. I am convinced that using cuebid to show both minors is a more sensible way than using it to ask stopper. If I play this way, I would stretch a 3 hearts, otherwise 3D.

they play canape style in preference of majors. they didn't address 4441, but I guess when one can response 4 card major, there's no need for special treatment

According to you, any one can forge zillions of "agreements" without giving any proof and argue that the hesitition doesn't matter because we play such and such, you can't find your note, it's your problem. FYI, Once upon a time, in an ruling/appeal case, a world class pair claims they play some special convention, and Mr. Nickell refuse to buy it. because they had no documentation, they had to ask Mr. Rodwell to testify against his own team to prove that such convention do exist, and Mr. Rodwell did it. Without proof, the so-called "agreements" are just self-serving arguments. Great, I suppose this is good news for everyone. I didn't know that. BTW, just to verify, Are you the guy who make the rules?

We already had a pretty thorough debate in the bridge side. Of course, you can signoff with primary cards after partner showing slam interest. that's your judgement. For me, It's just appalling to see someone, holding these cards, sign off immediately over a break-in-tempo slam invitation without a qualm Also, those who support the ruling, never want to address the problem how the "agreement" without evidence should be used in appeal cases. I don't expect to see it in the case book either. Actually, they probably won't even mention it.

2♥, the best lie

since you must be knowledgeable in this area, Could you please explain for us 1. How the "agreement" of East-West said they have but cannot prove such agreement do exist, should be used in the appeal process? 2. Usually, what does the committee should do, when one side of the appealing doesn't show up for the final decision? Thanks in advance

Ok, my fault, I didn't mention it because I thought is so obvious for any reasonable players. because East had passed, If there's any problem about this 3NT, it must be too weak, not too strong, there's only one direction one can expect. Isn't it clear? signoff 4H is obviously likely to be right after the hesitation. and a in tempo 3NT would have made the signoff virtually impossible, as examples many people has already listed here.