TimG

No, 3C would not be Stayman. In general, Stayman only applies after a no trump opening bid (2C-2D-2N counts as a no trump opening). In the auction you have provided, most players would consider 2NT to deny a four-card major (or perhaps be 4333 with a very bad four-card major). The correct bid is probably 3N.

I believe you can have it both ways: use 3M as either a trump ask or a blocking bid. When you simply want to block, responder will not have the trumps to cooperate, so he will pass 3M. I suspect you can construct a pair of hands where opener will want to block and responder will have enough in trumps to accept, but then responder's 4M is unlikely to be unwelcome.

One of the poll options was: "One of the previous bids was too terrible to contemplate" It sounds to me like jdonn might have made some campaign contributions to this candidate.

I tried to answer the other one honestly even though we could see that while game made it was less than 50%. But, it is hard to be totally objective when we see all four hands and/or know the outcome.

I readily accept that assertion. But, surely, continued membership in and financial support (let alone voting support) of the party that is most heavily implicated in this amounts to condonation of the practice? Staying silent, while sending in donations, or giving one's vote.. how is that different, in effect, from 'supporting' it? Would a disclaimer along with the check (or vote) mean that the supporter were not condoning all activities of the organization? Surely the vast majority who vote for a Republican or a Democrat do not agree with all planks of the party's platform. Same is likely true of contributors. By paying our ACBL dues to we condone all of the actions of the organization? I think that by enabling or supporting, we take on some of the responsibility, but that does not mean we condone. Nor do I think we have to be particularly vocal in our condemnation of certain activities in order to stand opposed. Of course, you may be right that in the case of voter fraud or tactics which prevent fair elections, we should be more vocal than we are. But, I still don't think that giving a check or a vote to the Republican or Democratic party means that the supporter condones all party activity.

I think I'd skip the invite and just bid game. Edit: I think this would have been better posed if we only got opener's hand and didn't know the other results.

Good enough to make seven.

It is common in a Calcutta for players in the event to own a piece of other players in the event. Generally, when a pair is sold, that pair must buy back at least 25% of themselves, and can demand up to 50% of themselves. But, anyone can resell their stake in a pair, to other players in the event or to individuals who are not playing.

If you think you can make 2NT, you should just pass 1NX. :-)

Not many comments for the most popular choice: pass. I pass because of the apparent misfit, the three small spades and because partner failed to bid 3♥ instead of 2♥.

If I double it is because I am treating this as a balanced hand too good to overcall 1N, so now I bid 2N.

If responder thinks diamonds have been agreed, shouldn't he bid 5C instead of 4S? With 4 Spade he showed his control, awaiting pds RKCB. :) Why should he bypass 4 NT and deny his control? If you must religiously bid any first or second round control, then perhaps you cannot bypass spades. But, opener is very likely short in spades and won't be much interested in the King. The Ace of Clubs is something that would seem to be of great interest to partner, however. Perhaps I am out of touch, but I don't think RKC must be bid along the way to every slam.

If responder thinks diamonds have been agreed, shouldn't he bid 5C instead of 4S?

Not all continuations suggest opener should "accept" with a good 14. Preference to diamonds leaves the auction open, but doesn't mean opener should be bidding game with his good 14s. He will bid again, however, when he has 17 or 18. You example auction, 1♦-1♠-2♣-2N, suggests a different strength hand than a mere preference to 2♦. I would expect around 10-11 for this 2N rebid.

It worked to get the US out of the Great Depression. I doubt many of us were around at the time, however.

Assuming I am 2245, I respond 1N.

I think it might matter whether 1N is forcing. If 1NT was not forcing, this is a super max and would probably qualify for a 2S bid. If 1NT was forcing, I still have a good hand, but not a super max; I would bid 3D. None of this should preclude playing in hearts since opener will often bid 3H next with a 64 hand.

Amusing, but not surprising!

1st seat white at MP, partner might already have gotten creative, so I just pass and hope the opponents misjudge or get back to the normal result. If I'm playing with a straight arrow partner, I might try 3S or 3N. With regular partners, I usually play that 3N followed by 4m invites opener to sacrifice, but I would not expect that to be the case without discussion.

1. Pass. 2. 7D. 3. Pass. 4. 4S. 5. Pass. I played in one NYC Calcutta and finished in the money, but it was a Flight B event!

I think it is better to lead the Jack, basically playing for the 9 to be onside. Though I suppose success of your line depends in part upon how often LHO will hop with his honor when you lead up to dummy. Edit:

Don't you need to cash the ♥A before throwing LHO in? I think you should lead the ♠10 on the second round of the suit so that you can repeat the finesse. If LHO is 0634 you can't make because RHO will get a 3rd round diamond ruff (either as the setting trick or to take partner off the endplay). But, this line makes when LHO is 0625.

Back when Roth invented the negative double, his definition was something very much like "doesn't fit any other bid".

Don't forget "how well it prevents the opponents from getting to the right spot". One of the perceived advantages of a canape system is that you are able to find your 4-4 major suit fits more quickly (because opener starts with 1M with many 4M5m hands), which makes it more difficult for the opponents to compete effectively. Some canape systems also allow for 1M-2M raises to made on three-card support, once again making it difficult for the opponents to judge when to compete -- they don't know whether you might be in a 4-3 fit -- even if this 4-3 fit isn't your side's "right spot". In my experience playing canape, when opener starts a canape by not bidding a long major and there is competition, it is right, in the long run, for opener to introduce his major even without encouragement from partner and even at a mildly uncomfortable level. It may seem like you are sticking your neck out, but the chopping seldom takes place and the risk is often necessary to get back to even. In many canape systems, negative doubles in the modern sense of showing 4 cards in an unbid major often don't make any sense, especially in a majors first canape approach where a 1m opening virtually denies a 4-card major. So, you'll probably want to tweak the expectation for a negative double and might even want to abandon them for penalty oriented doubles. As others have suggested, it's not really enough to describe a system as canape, important considerations will be what hand types use canape methods and how limited the canape openings are.

I'll try 4♥ and after 4♠-P-P to me will trot out 5♣.