miamijd

All of the US Bridge Federation events and a lot of the specials (like the Justin Lall memorial tournaments) are conducted on Real Bridge (online), where you have a "screenmate" just like you do in F2F bridge. Your camera is on.

I play a lot of online bridge, including some events where you have to use cameras so that you can see and hear your "screenmate."

I did read what you said. But I doubt you fully do it in practice. 1. As a preliminary matter, do you inform the opponents you randomize your tempo? They are entitled to know. Otherwise, as an example, when you hesitate awhile before playing a card, the opponents are reasonably entitled to infer that you don't have a singleton. 2. Even if you do inform the opponents, I doubt you truly randomize your tempo on defense. Don't you ever have to think about what card to play to a trick? If you do, then your tempo is no longer random. If you don't have to think, it's random. If you do ...

This is quite a horrible idea. Indeed, the opposite idea - a mandatory pause before declarer plays from dummy -- is probably called for so that the non-leading defender can think about his play and defense. Hare are a couple of examples why the auto-play is so awful: Suppose I am declarer at a NT contract and hold the AJx of hearts opposite a stiff in dummy. LHO opponent leads the Kh, and I have to decide whether I want to hold up to force a switch or to take the Ace. I might want to take the Ace if (A) It's MP and I think I can make all 13 tricks if things go well or (B) I am more afraid of a switch to another suit than I am of letting RHO in for a lead through my Jx. I'm going to need a little bit of time to think about this at trick one. If dummy auto-plays and RHO quickly plays a low spot, everyone is going to know what's up when I take 10 seconds to play. Far better if I take some time before playing from dummy (as I do on all hands, even the easy ones). Then no one really knows what I"m thinking about. Second example. Suppose the bidding goes 1NT-2C-2D-3NT by the opponents. You are defending 3NT and partner leads the 6h. You have the AQx of hearts and a nice hand overall, say 13 HCP. Dummy has a stiff heart and 10 HCP. The opponents play 15-17 NTs. Do you play the A or the Q at trick one? That mostly depends on whether you think partner has (A) the KH or an outside entry or (B) six hearts headed by the J and nothing else. If he has (A), playing the Ah at trick one is fine. But if he has (B), you need to play the Qh at trick one, so that declarer is forced to take the trick. Now when you get in, you cash A and hit partner. But if dummy auto-plays at trick one, then if you take a long time before playing the Q, declarer may well guess what's up and duck. If declarer does what he should do and takes at least 5 seconds or so before playing from dummy, then you have time to work out that the Q is right.

It is not ethical to play a card out of tempo in order to send a message to your partner or to mislead the opponents. If you have something to think about, fine. But to deliberately hesitate longer than your normal tempo with, say, a singleton, is unethical. So is play a card deliberately quicker than normal when declarer leads the J toward the AT9 in dummy and you have the Q. I'm sure you know this, right?

This is very strange. Wasn't just in Sec. 4, either. In Sec. 24, where I was placed: miamijd 67.92 1 0.90 mrwolf54 64.19 2 1 1 0.63 gkhaughey 60.81 3 2 2 0.67 How is it possible for gkhaughey to be behind mrwolf in the A, B, and C, but still get more ACBL MPs? He would have finished behind mrwolf in every section and in the overalls in each of A, B, and C. So mrwolf's maximum award MUST be greater than gkhaugheys. But yet it isn't. And in Sec. 25: GDL46 58.82 6 3 2 0.27 Pragmatic8 56.46 7 4 3 0.34 GDL beat Pragmatic in all flights for both section and overall awards. It is impossible for Pragmatic to get more MPs that GLD> And yet ... BBO needs to look at this.

Director was absolutely right on both counts. There WAS a rules change in the ACBL, and BBO goes by ACBL rules. Previously, if you bid a suit that was a transfer showing one specific suit, you (in online bridge) or your partner (in F2F bridge) just said "transfer." NOT "Alert" as someone above stated. "Transfer." That was changed. Now, if a bid is a transfer showing a specific suit, you say the suit. Thus: 1NT-2♦ as a transfer to hearts: Say "hearts" (or better, "transfer to hearts") If, however, your bid can have more than one meaning, you do NOT say transfer or the suit. You alert the bid instead and explain your agreement. Thus: 1NT - 2♠ range finder or clubs: You Alert and explain the bid as "range finder or clubs" 1NT - 2♠ showing clubs or diamonds: You Alert and explain "clubs or diamonds." If more is known about the bid, you state that as well. Thus, if it's always a weak hand, you say that, too. 1NT - 2NT showing diamonds (unspecified strength) OR a weak hand with both minors: Alert and say "diamonds (any strength) OR weak with both minors." In terms of the limit raise, no alert was required, but when you asked him about it, he is required to tell you his agreement regarding that bid. You can always ask an opponent about any bid you aren't sure about, even if it doesn't require an alert. They are required to tell you what their agreement is regarding that bid. For example: 1♠-2♠-3♦ 3♦ does not require an alert so long as your agreement is that you have at least 3 cards in diamonds and aren't showing or denying any other suit. But does 3♦ suggest some cards in that suit? Or does it show fear of diamond losers and asks for help? That might be useful to know, and you are entitled to ask the opponent what his agreement is. Cheers, Mike

By an unassuming cue bid I take it you mean a raise of openers suit after an overcall. Not alertable. And you can’t retract a bid on BBO. all you can get is an adjustment

The discussion so far has focused on what to lead in partner's suit against a suit contract. Stephen Tu's summary is excellent. Since the OP didn't specify suit contract vs. NT contract, I will note that the only major differences are: (A) you lead low from Axx(x), not the Ace, vs. NT contracts (B) from 3 small, high is very bad; you can either lead middle or low depending on your agreement © if you have KJx, consider leading the Jack. If you lead low, you may well block the suit. Cheers, Mike

It's not ethically questionable, in that nothing in the Laws prohibits it. On the other hand, it's not very nice and can serve to discourage beginners from wanting to play competitive bridge. I recall that in my mother's very first session of duplicate (back in 1985, with me), we faced an auction that went: (2H) X (2S) pass (3H) all pass I was the doubler. Mom had spades, but she didn't realize the 2 spade bidder was psyching; he had 7 HCP or so, a stiff spade and 4-card H support. After the auction, he said something to the effect of "Well, isn't that basically just a free psyche? After all, it's forcing, so I'll show heart support on the next round, at the four level if I have to." He wasn't playing with a regular partner, so they probably had no agreement here; thus, no alert. I wasn't very happy and told him so after the game. What he did was perfectly legal, but does he really think my mom is going to want to come back to play again if people do those sorts of things against duplicate newbies in a Saturday afternoon club game? So I would never question the ethics of someone who did it. I would, however, question their wisdom in terms of their commitment to promoting and expanding the game. Cheers, Mike

If you occasionally upgrade a good 14 to 15 and open 1NT (for example, a hand with three Aces, or hand with lots of 10s and 9s or maybe a hand with a good five-card minor), then you absolutely SHOULD put 14+ - 17 on your cc. Cheers, Mike

Goodness. I can't say as any of the players bid this hand well at all! 1H is way too aggressive. Just pass. I have more sympathy for the X than the other posters here. West has a nine-trick hand, for goodness sakes (assuming the opening 1H bidder has the Ah). She needs virtually nothing from her partner except the Ks. I would X as well, despite the lack of HCP, as I think this hand is way too good for a NV 4S bid. North's 1S psyche is just awful against competent opponents. East needs to X. Period. Do NOT play responsive Xs here. It's not just exposing psyches that's the problem. It's also the situation where North has four spades and South is void. You really want them to bid normally and talk you out of your 9-card fit? 2H is an awful call. You know partner has 2 or fewer. Why not bid 1NT or 2C? East's failure to X puts West in a tough spot. 3S sounds like you're asking for a heart stopper for 3NT here. When the opponents have bid two suits, you show stops rather than ask. So maybe you have a running minor and a spade stop. 2S sounds like a cue-bid, but I think that's what I would do. Then I would bid 3S over whatever East did, and hopefully he'll get the message. I don't see how East can pass 3S. Either East thinks this is showing a spade stop for NT (in which case, without a H stop, he has to bid 4C) or else he thinks West actually has spades, in which case he has an easy raise to 4. I would bid 4C and then pass West's 4S. Cheers, Mike

Almost - not quite. You are analyzing the hand only in terms of the "vacant places" principle. But if South has the Qs, then North has to have a decent bit of stuff beyond the AKxxxx of H for his 3H overcall. Yes, KQ of clubs would do it, but remember South threw the 9c (encouraging) at trick 2. Since dummy has the Ace, that would seem to suggest the K. If you give South the Kc, then it becomes more of a tossup as to where the Qd is. Cheers, Mike

The purpose of the 6H bid was to apprise you that you need to find better bots :) Cheers, Mike

It's not likely that South is 1156. Possible, sure, but since the H are 6/1, South is much more likely to be long in spades than North. There are thus two lines that are worth consideration: 1. The one Mikeh suggested. If South has the Qs, this makes 5 if North has the Qd and 4 otherwise. It loses when North has the Qs. 2. Discard from dummy and let South ruff. Win the club return and play the As from dummy. If both follow, you draw trump, pitch the club on a diamond and ruff the last heart. If South started with four trump, you hook the spade and run trump, hoping that North had the Qd (he'll be caught in the same show-up squeeze at the end). This never makes 5. It makes 4 unless South is 1156 or 41 in the majors with the Qd. So the cases are: A. North has a spade void: Line 1 makes 5 if North has the Qd and 4 otherwise. Line 2 makes 4 if N has the Qd or is -1 otherwise. B. North has a small stiff spade: Line 1 makes 5 if North has the Qd and 4 otherwise. Line 2 makes 4. C. North has the stiff Qs or Qx of spades: Line 1 goes down. Line 2 makes 4. The two lines are pretty close in expected tricks, but there is a key determining factor. Line 2 makes the contract a lot more often. In a normal so-so field, not everyone will be in game. Many won't open the West hand 2S, and if you don't, getting to game isn't 100%. Thus, I would go with Line 2, as the expected MPs here will be higher (you will almost always beat those who aren't in game). Cheers, Mike

Opener and responder are only totally unlimited if you play the 2D bid that way. Some players prefer so-called "negative free bids." With that treatment, non-jump bids between 2C and 3D show about 5-10 (maybe a horrible 11 if at the 3-level), a 5+ card suit (often 6+ cards) and no support for opener's major. With a good hand, you have to make a negative double first. If you play this treatment, the 2D bid is absolutely limited. I don't care for negative free bids. It's not so much the bid itself that is bad; indeed, it's a very useful treatment when you get the hand for it (and they do crop up rather often). The trouble is that it puts way too much stress on the negative double. Your improved bidding accuracy on the weaker hands is more than counterbalanced by your greatly decreased accuracy on the better hands. Cheers, mike

Some advice re Dancing with the Bots: 1. Never downgrade a hand to open 1NT. You will miss far too many games (remember, the Bots don't defend all that well early in the hand). 2. You can open a 4441 hand 1NT with a small stiff in a minor against the bots. That will work well. But if you stiff is in a major, you'll end up in a 5-1 fit far too often. Not advisable. 3. When a bot makes a 3-level jump overcall after your 1NT opening, they will have a VERY strong offensive hand (though generally not THIS strong). Cheers, Mike

Your partner's behavior is abusive. People who act that way detract from others' enjoyment of the game. In the USA, we have zero tolerance for that sort of thing. You should report him to BBO. Cheers, Mike

It's high time someone stood up for the GIB bots. They are the target of more abuse than Trump and Biden put together. And really, what did a GIB bot ever do to you? Hmm? No self-respecting GIB bot would EVER overcall 3H on AQx. Cheers, Mike

Or even simpler, just cash the Ad and lead either club. You know West has the Kc (East started with 4612, and you have seen the A and a small club. Also: (i) if East has the Kc you are dead and (ii) if East had the Kc, he would not have bid 2H. You also know West's original distribution: 2155. He has thrown two clubs and no diamonds, so he has 2 diamonds and 2 clubs left. So just cash the Ad and lead a club. West can cash his last diamond, but then he has to give you the club at trick 13. Cheers, Mike

In general, avoid bidding a 5-card weak 2 when you are 5332. Save it for unbalanced hands. Cheers, Mike

You can open 5-card weak 2s NV if you like, provided (A) your suit is decent; (B) you don't have outside defense; and © you aren't 5332. If you elect to do this, I would suggest a convention known both as Robinson (after Steve Robinson) and Meckwell Ogust (Jeff Meckstroth's version of modified Ogust). No one really knows who came up with it first (sort of like Truscott and Jordan). After a weak 2, 2NT asks. Then: 3C: the five-bagger 3D: in the lowest third in overall strength 3H: in the middle third in overall strength 3S: in the upper third in overall strength After 3C, 3D asks: 3H: bad hand 3S: good hand (maybe AKQxx or AKJTx and out)

The Kc was a reasonable opening lead given the bidding. That would have been my choice, for the reason you mentioned. But when dummy comes down, I think you should switch to the Qd at trick 2. Dummy has only three trump headed by the 9. Partner has a stiff heart (maybe a void). So if declarer's plan is to ruff hearts (the reason you led clubs), he is going to fail: partner will almost certainly be able to overruff. OK. What would declarer's Plan B be? Set up dummy's spades. This is especially true if declarer has Ks, for example. How do we foil that plan? Get the outside entry off the dummy. Your partner should see this as well when in with the first spade. He knows that declarer will fail if he tries to ruff H. What is declarer doing? Right - trying to set up spades. How do we stop that? Lead diamonds and remove the Ace. Cheers, Mike

When the robot follows with the Kc to trick one, either (A) the bot has Kx your partner three small or (B) the bot has a stiff and your partner has four small. If it's (A), you aren't going to set this contract. When the bots bid 3x over 1NT, they have a very strong hand, not so much a preemptive one. So you have to hope that the K is stiff. If that's the case, the bot has no entry to dummy's clubs (do NOT risk giving it one by leading from the Ks). So the bot has probably 7 hearts and the As. Where is it's ninth trick? A diamond ruff, a spade to the Q, and an endplay are all possibilities. You can see that a spade to the Q will fail, and there's not much you can do if declarer has KTx of diamonds and Ax of spades, so at trick 2, you should eliminate the D ruff possibility by leading a trump. Incidentally, I wonder why so many people reopened with a X after 3H. Yes, you have a full 17 and nice distribution, but the Qh is wasted for offense and you are vul, so that -1X is -200. I would just pass quietly and hope to set it. Cheers, Mike

Preempts work against Ron Gerard and Jeff Meckstroth alike. Indeed, it's more important to preempt against top players than against average ones. If you let top players have unimpeded auctions when you could have interfered, they will slice you up like a salami. Cheers, Mike