TimG

I liked the 1C start, then I could canapé reverse into diamonds. I don't really know where this is headed, so will go slowly with 2C for the moment -- there should be time to catch up later.

Multi auction, something like (2D)-X-(P)-3H; (P)-3N-(P)-4H; all pass. It was indeed a missed re-transfer -- actually missed the transfer, too.

Are the scores at the ACBL site on the bracket sheet page? (Which, BTW, is titled "seniorko.htm", just in case anybody from ACBL is reading this.)

I appreciate promotion of the game. I think this coverage of a Flight B event is especially nice even if I wouldn't want to read such a report every day.

Nothing in Bridge is certain. However, if one's 2m overcall is full value and proper shape, that XX by Advancer is going to make the opening side sweat. Justifiably. Because if the only thing the penalty pass was based on is a bad trump break, Overcaller (who has just been told how to play the hand) may very well make 2DXX. OTOH, if Overcaller is not full value or not proper shape, a scramble for a better spot commences. Either way, you rate to be better off than playing Standard. If my opponents want to redouble every time they get doubled in 2D, that's fine with me.

Back in the days before bidding boxes, it was common for the scoring table to be printed on the back side of the table cards (maybe it still is). An opponent was considering some 6-level action and asked if he could check the scoring table to see how much some slam making was. We called the director and the director told him the score! I wonder if that was a "mechanical aid"?

I've found one reference: KS Updated. In the responses to 1NT section it lists 4NT: "quantitative; if accept, bid suits up the line." It makes no mention of whether suits at the five-level are 4-card or 5-card suits, but "suits up the line" suggests four-card suit to me. I think the "if accept" part means that any move over 4NT accepts the invitation. I'm not suggestion K-S is standard, it's just the only reference I can find.

ACBL seems to disagree with you:

I wonder if either of us can find reference to this in the bridge literature. I'm fairly sure Marshall Miles touched on it in his recent book on constructive bidding. Maybe I'll look in my copy tonight. I looked through some books this afternoon, couldn't find any mention of bidding after a qualitative 4NT. The Bidding Dictionary seems to stop at 4S. I have lots of old standards, even Stayman's "Do You Play Stayman" in which he gives a scheme for showing exact point count after 1N -- 1N-4N = 16, 1N-2C-2x-4N = 17, 1N-5N = 18, 1N-2C-2x-5N = 19...or something like that -- but no mention of suit follow-ups.

It applies to all flights of the GNT and NAP, as well as things like the Red Ribbon Pairs, Mini-Spingold, etc. -- anything that is nationally rated.

It was actually red v white, 2nd seat.

Could that something be x xx AJxx ATxxxx?

I wonder if either of us can find reference to this in the bridge literature.

I'm happy with my actions on the first, and am happy to pass now. I would not have sat for 2Cx, I would have bid 2H instead. Having been able to bid 2H last round, I don't feel any need to any call over 3D.

Wow, I just assumed everyone was playing the same deals...I guess this explains some of those crazy results.

This is a I-got-you auction which would suggest some desperate measures would be called for, but I don't think pulling with Jx of partner's suit and Axxxx in your suit is called for.

If so, then with 732 AJ82 AK83 A7 opposite AKQ 932 Q54 KQ96, I assume it would be equally routine to bid 1NT-4NT; 5♦-6NT. The existence of a 4-4 fit is likely to be worth at least one trick. Is the five level really the right place to be doing this sort of investigation? As I said earlier in the thread, I have no problem with either 3NT or 4NT by responder -- I think it is close. I don't think opener has a close decision whether to pass or accept over 4NT. Yes, I would prefer methods that allowed for discovery over a 44 minor suit fit before the partnership gets past 4N. To Codo's suggestion that 5C shows a five-card suit: I disagree. I think standard is that a new suit at the five-level is a four-card suit and a new suit at the six-level is a five-card suit. (I also believe that any move over 4NT accepts the invitation, so stopping at the five-level is not an option.) As I just said, I'd like to be playing methods that allowed for some investigation below 4NT, but absent that, I think these are "standard".

You should have taken advantage of the delay in the new cell phone restrictions and called him. Congrats, Justin. It must be an incredible feeling to beat a team like that. Too bad there wasn't a little more about it in the Bulletin -- the #2 seed, especially this #2 seed, exiting so early is worthy of more coverage.

1N-4N; 5C-6C seems pretty routine once you decide to invite. I predict a series of posts saying that opener has a super obvious accept over 4N.

Isn't it bad to start showing suits when you should have a normal 1n-2n-3n sequence? 4NT for me. Why? This doesn't make sense; if partner has a max I am going to look for 6C. If she has a minimum she will simply bid 3NT, Wtp? But, when you have a normal 3NT invite (rather than the slam invite) and opener accepts the invitation, you unnecessarily give away distributional information.

Yep.

I was using a bridge.exe from May of 1999. I got out the original disc and switched to the March 1999 version. Neither work. What is the date on your version? Thanks. April 1999 12/04/1999 9:52pm (DD/MM/YYYY format) I am using a version of dealer named mdealer.exe which is dated 17/06/1999 9:30am Thanks again. The version of dealer.exe that I am using is dated 19 May 1999. (I modified and re-compiled it to include an alternate evaluation method, so the date isn't likely to match anyone else's version.) I re-downloaded it today and attempted to compile, but cygwin gave me an error when I issued the "make" command. What is the significance of the "m" in mdealer.exe?

I was using a bridge.exe from May of 1999. I got out the original disc and switched to the March 1999 version. Neither work. What is the date on your version? Thanks.

Thanks. I don't think I ever upgraded -- all I ever used GIB for was simulations -- but I'll see if I can find the original disc and make sure I'm using an old, old version.

I used to edit a Daily Bulletin for New England Regionals. I know it is very different that an NABC. But, I received very, very, very, few submissions. By this I mean that it was an unusual regional when there was as much as a single submission. And, some of the submissions were of the my-opponents-did-something-crazy-and-we-collected-1100 type (i.e. inappropriate for publishing). I suspect the NABC Bulletin editors are thankful for any submissions they receive and that they publish almost 100% of those that are appropriate.