TimG

Aren't you allowed to reevaluate your hand in the light of further bidding? I'm not saying that you should necessarily do so here (although it's quite tempting), but I don't like the principle that having limited my hand I'm not then allowed to change my mind about its value. But, this is sort of a case of 1N-4H (transfer)-think. Responder had ways of showing a hand that had a whiff of slam interest -- it's not for opener to re-evaluate here. Now, I admit that the auction in question is not an identical situation, but it is similar. While "never" may not be right, it seems that bidding on should be a very rare choice. "Only call" may have been an overbid, but not by much.

Yes. Wouldn't 5♦ show a willingness for diamonds? Yeah, but it wouldn't say a whole lot about spades. Ahh, right. Was confused...forgot we didn't show spades on the last round!

Yes. Wouldn't 5♦ show a willingness for diamonds?

I was thinking the same about 2♥.

If you're going to bid to 5H, how good do your clubs have to be in order for you to bid them along the way?

In this case the old methods are quite inferior I think, for example, the hand Jillybean had becomes pretty much unbiddable. Wouldn't you compete to 3♦ with something like xx x KQxx AQxxxx when the negative double is really a takeout double rather than a substitute spade bid? I don't think jilly's hand becomes unbiddable, I think a good/bad 2NT works nicely (my preference would be a direct 3D shows extras, 2NT followed by 3D shows a hand that is merely competing, but many prefer the other way around).

It's not grand slam force?

4. Partner has hearts, but not enough strength to show them.

Well, it was more of a general comment because I see it a lot and dislike it. If you arguing a lot against your partner's call on a public forum works well for your partnership then please ignore my comment, it depends a lot on the people involved. Sorry, Richard, if my comments have been non-constructive or inappropriate.

That would be me he's talking about. But, you are wrong about the thread being used to settle a difference of opinion.

I disagree. I don't want to be faced with a high level decision without first getting my primary suit into the auction.

I'm shocked! This 3 QT hand doesn't qualify as a "relatively sound" opening bid?

Why would it be wrong sided? Wouldn't we want responder's diamond stopper in declarer's hand?

Maybe it's a minor semantic issue, but I prefer to think "what does a limit raise show?"

I think that one of the poll questions highlights some wrong thinking: "Pass This is damn far from a maximum 1H opening". The question isn't whether the hand is maximum or minimum, but rather whether there is a good expectation of making game opposite a limit raise. The given hand counts to 6 losers (adjusting for two more aces than queens). A limit raise is typically 8 losers. This means we should bid game. You also would have opened T2 A9742 AK8 T72. Same points but not as good as the actual 2542 hand.

If someone picks the 5th poll option, are they really abstaining?

Maybe 1H-1S-P-2H; 3D-4S-P-P; 5D, after which there would be little reason for east to take a false preference to hearts.

If you go back and read the 19 pages, you will find that from very early in the thread there were suggestions about what ACBL could do to better protect against cheating (i.e. be more responsible) without inconveniencing so many players. Posters have put forth suggestions in an attempt to be part of the solution (and I'm sure the suggestions were made to officials rather than just made in this thread). The ACBL is a membership organization and as such has responsibility to its members which may include justifying rules that it imposes on the players/members.

Because we counted our points and had a club stopper. ... and happen to hold a bal. shape. Making discovering 44 / 53 fits in a mayor easier. Easier than after a double? Won't advancer sometimes have a four-card major without enough strength to act over a NT overcall, thus missing a 4-4 fit that would have been found after a double?

Because we counted our points and had a club stopper.

I don't carry my cellphone at a big (or small) tournament. I'm not sure why anyone would need to. Where do you leave it ? Walk back to your hotel room at a big hotel and event and spend 10 to 15 minutes round trip or walk to your car and spend almost the same time at a big venue !? Yes, I leave it in the car or hotel room. If I don't get to it between sessions, that's fine with me. I'm sure I under utilize my cell phone, at least by many people's standards.

Wouldn't opener have bid 3♠ instead of 3♦ with a 5xx6 hand? King 5th seems like a decent stopper and after the 3♦ bid, if it shows a fragment, three of responder's six HCPs are likely wasted when it comes to a slam.

What's "GMAT"?

I think you've twisted things around: the 1♥ opening was in front of the hand with the ♥K and the 1NT response over the 1♠ intervention. That is, the bidding suggest both the ♥A and ♠K are onside. I agree that north should show a four-card raise. I can understand downgrading a 4333 hand with four-card support, but this is a good example of the dangers of doing that.

You finally got it!