TimG

There are a significant number of people who seem to table hop. One of the most significant differences between BBO and OKbridge (that I have found) is that an empty seat on BBO is almost immediately filled (and no one even asks whether it is OK to sit -- I find that rather rude), while on OKbridge is often takes a few minutes to find someone to fill an empty seat (and they generally ask, at least say hello, before sitting). I think a useful feature would be some sort of table note that allows someone who hosts a table to make some sort of brief statement about policy at their table.

This hand just showed up on RGB: 2 KQJ4 KQ72 QT83. It was also in 4th position. You wouldn't have gotten the honors wrong just a bit, would you?

I don't like the negative double (I'd hate for partner to convert it to penalty), but seems you got away with it. You wanted to bid 4-non-forcing-clubs, which is why you started with a double, now I'd follow through and bid 4C. Yes, they could be trying to steal our heart fit, but I don't really care so much with the clubs I'm holding. I think with 55 in the majors, opener should have bid 4H over 3H, so that his double here just shows defensive orientation, not a true heart stack. They may have made things difficult for us with the 3H bid (which could be a non-suit), but sometimes they get us, and the auction is not over. Though I'm not confident that we'll ever be able to stop in hearts without doing some guessing.

First hand: Certainly not ace (or keycard) asking. If opener really likes a spades or diamonds, he can cue-bid a club or heart control to say so. Responder is the captain here; makes little sense for opener to be taking over. Second hand: a not-purely-penalty, penalty double. Responder has shown hearts, so opener doesn't need a trump stack, just s defensive oriented hand, I wouldn't even require extras, just a strong preference for defending.

1♠, might have opened 1♦, but I would still rebid 1♠. Tim

Playing in even tempo is to be commended, but I imagine you are VERY slow if you take 5-15 seconds to play each card. And, I don't think varying between 5 and 15 seconds is even tempo. I would expect that most card plays are made in 2-5 seconds, taking 10 seconds to play a singleton is excessive.

If the contract is NT and you expect your partner to have an entry, often right to clear the suit. If a suit contract and you expect declarer to have pitches available, it could be right to cash your second trick. I'm sure there are other times when it is right to play a second round. But, I think you are on the right track: probably right to do somethng else unless you can think of a good reason to play the second round of the suit. Tim

Assuming that, how is opener supposed to know whether 3Mis a simple game force or maybe a little bit more -- slam interest? Opener can make a courtesy cue-bid on the way to 4M, but how is responder supposed to know whether opener is just being courteous or has some extras? I think one drawback to 2/1 is players' reluctance to ever jump with extras. Some would open 1S and rebid 2S after a GF 2/1 with any hand with 6 (non-solid) spades, whether it has 12 or 18 HCP. I think the same sort of mentality is present with those who don't like SJS: no need to jump about when you can establish forces other ways, but this often makes slam exploration more difficult (or more of a stab in the dark). Tim

Passing 4S seems quite conservative.

I think 1S then 2S might be right even if opener rebids 2H.

In borderline cases, I generally consider my holding in partner's suit. Here, I don't want to encourage a spade lead (should LHO come to life), so I pass. Given the same strength and shape, but with a higher honor in partner's suit, I would raise. Tim

What NT range do we play in 2nd seat? If the auction is three passes to me, I'm content to pass this one out and move on. Tim

I want to the reporting process to be as simple as possible. We don't want lots of people investigating on their own, that will only generate bad feelings. This is not a job for vigilantes. Sure, some would be capable of investigating discreetly, but the vast majority of investigators would offend someone, especially considering these investigators would likely be biased (since they thought enough of the original incident to report it in the first place). Those accused are much less likely to be offended if the people investigating the allegations are considered neutral. I'm quite happy with "frivolous" complaints so long as the accused never sees them. The body (or person) assigned to the complaint would speak to the accuser (if appropriate) and the accused (if appropriate) and save the complaint (if appropriate). The problem arises when a "frivolous" complaint is the potential for confrontation between the accuser and the accused. Tim

I understand. But, if individuals are discouraged from reporting incidents unless they have 3 or 4 examples, then lots of incidients will go unreported, incidents that could, when added together, make a strong case. Tim

Firstly, allow me to apologize if I somehow indicated my post was some sort of expert opinion. I merely requested further information as to how 5NT would mean "pick a slam" for my own edification. Secondly, yes, to introduce a new suit at the 4-level on this auction would imply that I can handle partner running back to his suit, at least with the methods normally employed in my regular partnerships. Perhaps this is not the same thing as support, but my intent was the same, hence the word "imply". I fail to understand where "nerve" enters the picture. In fact, I would remind you that my post concluded with, "I am probably totally wrong, but that's likely what I would do at the table." That is, in fact the reason for the post. 4♠ seems like the natural call to me, but it is apparently not correct so I was interested in comments about it. However, I can see I will have to be more careful in the way I express myself if my posts elicit responses like yours. I found nothing wrong with the tone of our post -- no "nerve". But, I do not thik 4♠ has to imply any club support. What would you bid with AKQJxx xxx xxx x or AQJTxx xxx Kxx x, or even AKQJTxx xxx xxx --? Tim

I would not say it was a psyche if east went through the asking process even with a weak hand and long hearts. What does partner have? With a huge 4054/4045 partner could have bid 4♥ over 3♠, so I tend to expect he has at least one heart. Given east's bidding, he probably has length in both majors, maybe 4-5 spades and 3 hearts. That means partner is probably 4144/4153/4135 (partner might have doubled initially with a five-card major, but would likely have bid 3♠ over 3♣ with that hand, so I'll place him with four spades. Partner must have a very good hand, so I'll double 4♥ to show my balanced hand and maybe slow partner down a bit. If partner does have a huge 4054 type and forgot to bid 4♥ over 3♠, he has another chance -- my double can hardly be a trump stack, just a statement of preference for defense. Tim

I'm not sure why you want to limit the committee members to ACBL Directors (managers, teachers and owners). Passing a club director test (opening a club or teaching a lesson) does not make one qualified to investigate cheating allegations.

It shouldn't be the job of those reporting to gather multiple hand records. I might feel an action is suspicious, but not end up playing against this pair (or individual) again for weeks (or ever). There should be a central depository of reports and when a certain name keeps popping up a closer examination of events should take place.

I think maybe someone is exploiting a flaw in your system!

What youhave described here is not a psyche, but rather a two-way agreement of some sort. Those are common and I'm sure you've run into them from time to time: 1) Stayman: usually invitational or better with a four-card major, rarely a weak three-suiter short in clubs (and traditionally also rarely the prelude to a sign-off in 3C); 2) Polish club: often natural with clubs, often a weak or mini NT and sometimes a string hand; 3) traditional multi: either weak with one of the majors or some variety of strong hands. The difference between these types of agreements (and the 1NT call you describe, which is similar to a comic NT overcall) and psyches is the "agreement" part. There may also be a difference between these types of methods and Richard's "mixed strategy" in that Richard does not seem to want to include his partner in the information exchange -- the mixed strategy is intentionally designed to keep partner in the dark while not affecting the effectiveness of the strategy. That is, they present problems, but only to the opponents, not to partner. I think we're dealing with three different things (multi-meaning bids, psyches and mixed strategies) and that it is important to remember this when discussing them. Tim

The world of pick-up partners often stinks. It is true that partners should not leave in the middle of the game, but they will. Just like in ftf bridge partners shold not criticize partner, but they do. The answer, in online or ftf, is to find compatible partners. It may take a little while, but it is worth the effort. Tim

Before looking at the other answers: 1) 1S, 4S and redouble are all bad, IMO. It's hard to say which is worse, but I guess south gets twice the blame because he made twice as many questionable calls. 2) Opening 2NT is off the wall crazy. And, I would agree it is evidence that whoever made the bid is not advanced (especially in combination with bidding on over 4H). Of course, that's no reason to get up and leave.

How do I continue the relay?

3rd and 5th really means: 3rd from even, low from odd. It doesn't mean you lead either the 3rd or 5th best when you have a five card suit.

You mean dummy can't hold some minor suit kings?