Mkgnao

barmar-Mkgnao 24-70 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1a51963c.949f.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1504879672&u=Mkgnao vilgan-Mkgnao 42-24 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:40449125.928c.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1504651672&u=Mkgnao

oyoleo-Mkgnao 32-58

Nige1-Mkgnao 29-23 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:745482ce.8dbf.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1504123908&u=Mkgnao wackojack-Mkgnao 30-20 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:5641a94a.8cf5.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1504037100&u=Mkgnao

icycookie-Mkgnao 14-23 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:8e46c78f.8cb8.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1504010994&u=Mkgnao

gszses-Mkgnao 32-16 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:c43678b2.8b90.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1503883954&u=mkgnao

zzzzisaac-Mkgnao 9-55 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:d4d9f889.8b69.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1503867231&u=Mkgnao

At the table, I pressed on with 3♠. 3♠ -1 was 36%: most pairs were in 2♠ making, 3♠ -1 or -2 and 3♠ was made three times (the latter requiring a horrific defence). The full hand: [hv=pc=n&s=skqt42hk972d9852c&w=s9765haqt4daca982&n=saj8h865dk4ckj643&e=s3hj3dqjt763cqt75]399|300[/hv] As you can see, partner tried to trap the opponents with his heavy 2♠-bid. I thought I'd diagnosed overbidding in competitive 3 over 3 situations as one of my leaks, so I told myself only to bid on with extra's: an extra trump, significant extra HCP or a powerful void (in this case in their suit). Initially I thought raising to 3♠ was automatic so I ascribed the result to bad luck but soon afterwards I began to get second thoughts. Partner is likely to have 4+♣ on the bidding and if he has his promised 6-9 HCP, then combined with my 8 HCP the opponents will have 23-27 HCP. In other words, the 3♠-bid runs the risk of giving the opponents only winning options: either doubling 3♠ or bidding a making game. (Though the club break will remain a liability for 3NT.) About the meaning of the double, no one at the table aside from opener knew what her double meant. As a final note, I polled my real life partner and he clearly favored 3♠ over pass. Ok, he's a junior but still it was surprising to see that almost everyone chose pass with only Cherdano contemplating bidding. Groupthink or glorious insight?

Yes, but since we played in a pick-up partnership, we didn't have an agreement what the redouble would have been. No agreement about a Rosenkranz redouble (http://www.bridgebum.com/rosenkranz_double.php).

You hold: ♠ KQT42 ♥ K972 ♦ 9852 ♣ - MPs, all vul: (1♣*) - p - (1♦) - 1♠ (dbl) - 2♠ - (3♣) - ... *: 1C could be 2 but only if 4432. Strong partner, weak opponents. What would you bid?

I'm in.

I thoroughly enjoyed the story. The schedule of two long lessons plus a tournament each day sounds gruelling for juvenile newcomers but I'm glad to hear it turned out well. Thank you for your part in reviving the comatose patient. By the way, they're trying to revive an ancient tradition of youth camps in The Netherlands this year. The problem is that they made the camp insanely overpriced: €195 for barely 3.5 days which explains the title of the following link ("inschrijving jeugdkamp nog steeds geopend wacht niet langer"; in translation "enrollment youth camp still opened, don't wait any longer"). http://www.jeugdbridge.nl/?post=inschrijving-jeugdkamp-nog-steeds-geopend-wacht-niet-langer

It does, since GIB is a timid bidder and he virtually always has a maximum for his bidding. So if you have the best hand at the table and partner is max for his bidding you will play more games.

4th set: Mkgnao - ntchai 22-25 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:812446ae.59f0.11e7.be39.0cc47a39aeb4-1498427515&u=Mkgnao I think this format is really bad. IMPs is not a good choice, since GIB is unable to bid reasonably. And if you combine IMPs with non-best hand, then you are constantly playing boring partscores for washes. At least playing MPs, you can make a difference on every board in your cardplay and playing best hand IMPs, you get a lot of games so more boards are interesting.

1st set: ntchai-Mkgnao 31-19 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:460fd295.54ca.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1497861339&u=Mkgnao 2nd set: ntchai-Mkgnao 29-10 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ee8df1de.568c.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1498054895&u=Mkgnao 3rd set: ntchai-Mkgnao 6-13 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:a5837580.5789.11e7.be39.0cc47a39aeb4-1498163435&u=Mkgnao Score with one set to go: 66 vs. 42 (-24)

That'll teach you not to piss off GIB on the previous boards.

No play is a bit of a stretch since you make it with ♠A onside and an automatic ♣-♥-squeeze if the defender with 4+♣ holds 5+♥ or ♥QJx/QJxx. On the lay-out of ♠A onside and ♥QJ tight, the contract is cold. Aside from all the practical extra chances that the defenders will make fatal discards on the run of all your trumps. Though I agree with the gist of your post that a grand slam with the hand you gave as dummy is a bad one.

10+ with a hand oriented for defence, but we tend to avoid redouble since it makes our auction murky.

I'm used to playing 1NT as 8-10 in a competitive auction like 1x - (1y/dbl) - 1NT and 1NT as 4-11 in a non-competitive auction like 1x - (p) - 1NT. For example, 1♦ - (1♥) - 1NT promises 8-10 and a ♥-stopper, while 1♦ - (p) - 1NT would show 4-11. The main difference between the competitive and non-competitive auction is that you will pass with 6-7 balanced after a double/overcall, while you would respond with 6-7 in an uncontested auction. The idea of passing with 6-7 bal. is that partner will often be minimum (say 11-13) so there is no need to rush to 1NT with neither a known fit nor the balance of the points. I review 6-7 unbal. on a case-to-case-basis and of course, there can be tactical reasons for responding 1NT on say a 0-2 count in both a contested and uncontested auction in the hope of increasing the likelihood of the opponents missing their game. With regard to 2NT after interference over our 1x-opener, I use almost the same agreements as I would without the interference. This means that after a 1m-opener 2NT is good 10-11 and after a 1M-opener 2NT is still M-fit. There is one difference: if we open 1M and they overcall, then the cue-bid shows 3 card support and 2NT shows 4+ card support. For example, 1♥ - (1♠) - ... 2♠ = 3 card, invitational or better and 2NT = 4+ card support, invitational or better.

In.

Thanks for the courtesy of re-playing the match, Michael. m1cha-Mkgnao 6-4 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:b59490b8.2fa5.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1493777442&u=mkgnao In the mean time, smerriman has posted the result of our match as well so from my point of view, if phoenix214 plays his set then I've finished all my challenges.

I've finished all my boards, except for the expired match against m1cha.

linxu01 - Mkgnao 5 vs. 5 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:a587a722.2965.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1493090220&u=mkgnao

I missed the deadline, because I cannot keep up to pace under the current circumstances of being on holiday. With not being able to keep up to pace I mean, I can play 1 or 1.5 matches per day as the tournament schedule used to be but every day 2 is too much. In this case, the challenge was automatically accepted as I added all opponents of my group to my friend list in order to smoothen the process of the challenges. I propose the following solution m1cha: you choose between an automatic win or we re-play the challenge.

ant590 - Mkgnao 2 vs 8 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:16b202f5.287b.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492989478&u=mkgnao

nigel1 - Mkgnao 6-4 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ca785e61.26af.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492792211&u=mkgnao