TimG

I've heard it called a "sex scandal" in the media many times, the latest being on NPR this morning. Just wondering if you think it amounts to a "sex scandal"?

That seems a little harsh, especially given that gwnn is concerned enough to be asking here. I'd temper with things like "I thought" and "possible BIT" rather than jump in there with "unethical".

Why would you ask? It can only suggest to your partner that you have reason to believe there was a failure to alert because you have long spades. That's UI information to your partner.

Sure, the Feds should look into that, but no need to involve the general public in that process.

This morning's Boston Globe online features the headline "Broadwell fell short of her degree goals at Harvard". I don't see the point in "add[ing] to the portrait of the biographer" as the article purports to do. (I didn't read beyond the headline and accompanying blurb.) Part of the privacy issue is a two-way street, the media would not be trying to create a portrait of Broadwell if the public didn't demand it through their choices about what to read and watch. I don't see why this should be dominating the news. CIA director had an affair, decided to resign as a result, resignation was accepted. Let's move on. No need for rubbernecking.

I suspect most hands where responder has enough to invite, he would have started with redouble.

I wonder what North was thinking when he passed 2♠.

General Bridge Knowledge.

My guess would have been that it was inappropriate for North to call the director and tell the table there had been MI during the auction. North likely came to the conclusion based upon his hand and telling this to the table gives his partner information, it seems to me that there would be no danger of NS providing UI to each other if the call waited until the completion of play. But, I could be wrong about the proper time to call. The director should have made it clear in his ruling whether North had called at an inappropriate time or not. West will either have been informed by the director that North has done nothing unethical or will have witnessed the director explain proper procedure to North. Either way, he should let the matter rest. Any claim by West that NS have acted unethically should be met with a director call rather than a retort. Let the director take care of it.

They are in the majority. And, are probably telling their friends about the guy who psyched against them and explaining that it is players like you that make them wonder about continuing to play in clubs.

Pass would be very low on my list of choices. I like 4♠. Over 5♣, I'll try 5♥. Doesn't this mean that I am looking for trump honors and secondary spades rather than secondary clubs?

Old fashioned is that 1S followed by a preference to 2H is stronger than a direct 2H. If you want to make the weakest raise possible, a forcing NT followed by preference would be in order. But, that was all before the days of "constructive" single raises. Now I bid 4S and hope the double fit gets us home.

At IMPS, it seems obvious to lead a club. At MPs I think a good case can be made for trying not to lose a trick on the opening lead.

Maybe they voted not to repeal Roe v Wade and not to reinstitute DADT. To think that the election was a referendum on any one issue is pretty silly, IMO.

It has been discussed here. As I recall, it is not allowed in ACBL events.

I'd bid 4♠ (I'd like a little something more for a splinter). If RHO competes over 4♠, I'm content to pass it around to partner.

You should be able to parse the PBN files with your favorite programming language, perl is probably suited well to this task. Then you can count whatever you want.

Where would you look?

Using this argument, there is no way this pair could get the auction right after a hesitation. Suppose South had intended it as KC for diamonds and north responded as such and they ended in 6D. Now you would say "top pairs have hundreds if sessions under their belts and might have a problem with this 4N, how can we expect this pair to get it right without use of UI?" You've said it's natural with one of your partners, other Phil thinks it is normal for it to be natural. I think it should be natural (though I'm surely not as on top of bidding theory as either of you) second choice would be KC for diamonds, it would not occur to me that it was KC for spades. Even though I think it should be natural, I understand 4NT is seldom natural in today's bridge world, so I would consider it for a few moments before making a 4NT call I intended as natural almost regardless of sequence. I would also consider it a few moments if I intended it to be KC for either spades or diamonds since I want to make sure I can handle the responses and have a plan so that I don't break tempo over a KC response. Anyway, put me in the camp of this appearing to be a case of "if it hesitates, shoot it".

Modified how? What are our agreements about 1st seat white on red preempts? Do I have a way to follow Ogust with a forcing call below game that agrees spades? Given what might pass for a 1st seat whilte on red preempt, I'd be inclined to just bid 4♠ unless any of the answers to the above questions indicate a viable alternative.

Pass. WTP?

Partner is going to have an entry and clubs good enough to run? That sounds like 11 tricks in clubs: 7 clubs, three side Aces, plus partner's entry. You might make 5♣ if opener has KQJTxxx of clubs and out (likely not much worse than the diamond finesse) while 3N is pretty hopeless. Looks to me like 5♣ has more going for it than 3N.

There is no such thing as Evolution., just a myth of the Liberal media.

Then try again to explain what the purpose of your post is.

That's pretty funny. . .in an a$$hole sort of way.