dsLawsd

Interesting, but computers are not good at parsing suit texture OR honor location in general. If the hand looks no-trumpish then 1NT gives some bailouts whereas strong suits give protection vulnerable at spades. On a good day things go well. On a bad day whatever I choose turns out rather poor. And course there are some 17 point hands and some 17! point ones. At least one of my partnerships past, this issue changed our 1 NT to 14-16. I suspect spades being the boss suit tends to be chosen whenever doubt exists... That is why I keep a daily record with remarks for regular partnerships to analyze + or - results. That means, of course, that you needs quite a lot of them to be statistically meaningful. Thanks for this interesting view.

Mr. Tu has said a lot. What matters also is that you should project how the defense should go. Do you want a ruff later somewhere? Do you need to know whether to shift or continue/ If so, you might lead a King to decide that if partner holds the Ace. Matchpoints or Imps? strategy shifts from max to insure a set sometimes. Your signal toolkit may indicate a procedure. One interesting feature from Zia-Rosenberg is that they play regular signals for count and attitude at trick 1, Upside-Down for the rest of the hand. Naturally, this is why defense is the most difficult part of the game.

What could partner have to double first and then jump to 3♠ showing a strong hand? about 8-9 tricks and you have KQxx! I might have just overcalled 4♠to start... Part of our bridge education?

Ouch. Robots tend to overuse point count (they double count honors + shortness). Something to be said for rebid of 1NT with 12-14. Worth considering suit quality in first or second seat. It sometimes is worth while passing this hand first, although it goes against the grain playing with a real partner1

This is one of the best questions I have seen here! The focus is on partnership agreements plus listening to the bidding plus looking ahead to how the auction will likely proceed. First seat preempts have to consider partner (non passed hand) and whether we are playing IMPs or MPs. Hand 1- bid 1 or 3 depending. OK either way for me. BUT partner should bid 4/3 knowing we do not have hearts. Hand 2- too strong to pass- some might double but 3♣ seems about right- it can be dangerous crossing the street. Hand 3 requires an agreement as to what 3♣/3♦ mean= asking or telling with what tolerance for spades. All because 2♠show hearts and a minor suggesting the hand may not break favorably for game. Hand 4- 3♠shows a very good 6 or 7 card suit with some fitting values (else bid 2). 3♦cue might work but perhaps a Qxx holding in clubs would be better. For aggression 4♦ void in support could work depending on partners strength where 6 could make if holding the mini AKxxxxx clubs and the spade K. Again, what minimum does partner need for 2♣ here? Sounds like a good partnership is developing for you!

Eight hearts + club A? Let your partner field it I guess? What did the self-kibs do?

What "they" said. The problem is that GIB robots straight jacket us so often. We use Gerber when we think we will have to mastermind the auction and suspect otherwise GIB will go crazy on us. For partnerships I recommend Kantar's very complete book RKC: The Final Word where various bids are necessary- (often 4 ♣ or 4♦) become the asks. There is a complete section on minor suits and of course the material on what you need to use RKC and various asks such as for Queens, specific Kings, and those some times critical holdings in a side suit. Not for the squeamish for sure. So many times it will be better not to use either RKC or Gerber at all. On this fun hand Stayman might be right depending on the score although I like just bidding 6NT and let them find a lead...

Play only with people you "know" with convention cards similar to yours. I choose not to play on BBO at all, but would in an all expert game or if looking for a permanent partner. Just like wearing a mask hides expressions, here the computer does it. At least in a money game you cut around and can leave whenever. Earning the coin of the realm is a good incentive... Back in the 90s we had fun and met some great people on-line. Not so much right now

I used to play "electronic twos" with a suit of any texture (but within the ACBL guidelines of HCP so that you can have systemic responses else not) in the 80s. We found that they were good enough at Matchpoints- so so at IMPs. Look at what the many expert partnerships are playing and emulate the one style you like consistently. I always liked disciplined in 1 and 2 seats- about anything in 3rd and strong in 4th. But in the crapshoots of today it seems lighter can help. And of course Polish might be the best of all showing 5-5s BUT in ACBL many events did not allow 2♦ Multi which can be essential in certain positions. If you read the old The Bridge World issues you can see Edgar Kaplan talking about the poor results from the US team being all over the map costing big IMPs. And Howard Schenken lectured about the dangers of an improper weak two. Be true to your partnership, actively alert unusual understanding and expect some wins and losses. But have firm understandings and stick with them...

I define stupid (when it is mine)as knowing exactly what to do and then going right ahead and doing something else. I did that in the finals of a National (ACBL) event by getting ahead of myself one trick in a contract. When my partner asked about it I said to all 3 at the table a single word- Stupidity... I suspect we all do these things through lack of sleep and other reasons- the great players just do fewer of them. Partly, it can be time pressure that gets us. I find that playing on line when not playing in an all expert game that I do it way too often. F-2-F we have to answer to teammates and partners so that helps. Anyone else??

Double. A zero is just a zero and I do not want them to steal. That is why so many play some version of a Forcing club after all. Many top pairs play through 7 as negative. That, of course, puts lots of pressure on the open bidder. And the opponents will have to field the next call also. At Imps I pass and may regret it.

You can use the Deal Source feature. Choice 2 is for random ViewGraph hands which show the results of their event with IMPS. Option 3 is to specify a particular event such as the 2011 Bermuda Bowl. Naturally these IMPS may be skewed if played only 2 or 3 times. But you can see how they bid and played them and that can improve your own judgment. I enjoy that with 3 robots instead of solitaire practice. The deals come in sets of 16...

If, as it appears, that this auction was brought to the attention of the TD then that should be the end of the matter and the incident should be recorded. In the ACBL that would be a memo to the recorder. The TD should urge the person who said they mis-clicked to change their settings to verify their bids. These things do happen. But well regarded players should be extra careful when playing against lower rated or inexperienced pairs (if that was the case). The TD did have the option to adjust the score and apparently chose not to do so. ACTIVE ETHICS///

This hand is too strong for a 15-17 1NT. So 1♦-1♥ followed by 2NT or even 3♣at IMPs. Your heart K is pulling full value so game is at least 50%, probably considerably more. Hand evaluation is great for balanced no-trump, but requires more judgment at suits. At matchpoints one will have to rely on partner's judgment as to whether to venture to game or not. That might depend upon the strength of the field or section and the state of your score up to that point. At rubber bridge game should be reached IMO.

It might be useful in designing your system. And if your IMP score is much better than MPs perhaps you can make adjustments in the later. I find that the best way to improve these days is to play some with 3 robots and use random or specific Vu-graph hands to compare against the top players. At events where you know many contestants it can help find future compatible partners or teammates. Fun suggestion!!

I said Yes, but that depends on having well-tuned understandings on these auctions. In that case I would not bid diamonds, but would double expecting a misfit and hope for the best. If partner was only kidding then he can pull to 3♥. Without the above I Pass...

It is the wild West- in ACBL-land as opposed to other games the singleton must be the A,K, or Q. But the question is how to improve your game and this hand should open 1♣ in MHO. The bots frequently crush my efforts, but I want to be a better player in those Tough Games. There are too many major suits fits that will score higher- perhaps a lot higher - I enjoyed your report and the play problem it creates! Thanks for that.

Great analysis! I just hope that West did not "know" partner had good heart support. Perhaps they were trying to steer N_S into a poor contract? It certainly makes the declarer wonder...

It seems as if 4♣ would show a singleton club with excellent trumps (spades) inviting a heart Q by partner. If that or 4 NT is bid then maybe some slam is on. Over 3♣forcing that must imply diamond support but GIB went crazy- did that give him 6 diamonds to KQ the A of hearts and JXX of spades? You have not shown North yet! Regards---

For Board 5 it is not a 2♠ bid because with KJx of hearts and a void there are multiple potential places to play it and you are preempting yourself. 1NT cannot be faulted, but at IMPs 1♣may be better to start for much the same reason as you can "smell" a potential misfit plus the possible slam in the unusual case. At any game I visualize the possible problems in transportation. In 4 ♥ I would duck a trump to East and see what happens... A great set of hands for discussion!

1NT to show a balanced hand with stoppers. Then 2C asks about hearts invitational. Playing XYZ would of course suggest 2♦because of the good heart suit. But 3 NT might be an easy to make given the positional values.

What they all said/ Plus consider using Upside Down signals so that a small card tends to encourage and high discourage. Sometimes you cannot discard in a suit that needs a shift. Zia+Rosenberg use them EXCEPT at Trick 1. That could be extended in some cases I suppose. And always disclose your agreements on your Convention Card or wherever your organization says...

At IMPS I view the 5 clubs as enough to go on, but Pass at Matchpoints. If partner is a good declarer. On a bad day it will be -320 or so. Of course the length of the match and the state of our game will influence the action. At $ don't we want to be there? It might even come down to the spade J being a half-stopper. I wouldn't criticize either Pass or bid by my partner however.

For fun I like bidding 2♠ and let the opponents decide in their 15 seconds.

These are good suggestions in the whole. A lot depends in what you want out of bridge: competition, place in club games, or develop expertise? For the best of bridge you will need a live, competitive partner with the same objectives. Having not played in tournaments much recently, I established a self-improvement plan. Of course, while I find that competitive bridge has changed in the last decade in bidding, having been a Life long subscriber to The Bridge World kept the shock down and my skills decent. Unfortunately, COVID-19 has stopped my ultimate goal: to find an appropriate regular partner- better to that in person IMHO. But beginning in April 2019 I decide to play the robot tournaments to add Master Points to my total. Playing the robot game is like playing as a semi-pro in that you must handle their crazy mistakes and lead them toward sanity when possible. That can improve your game. I also set about to reread my very well stocked bridge book library including: The Secrets of Winning Bridge by Jeff Rubens Matchpoints by Kit Woolsey The Rodwell Files by Rodwell (this book has improved my already good declarer play by at least 10%) Roman Keycard Blackwood- the Final by Edwin Kantar (only when ready with an advanced partner!) All 52 Cards by Marshall Miles (terrific) Following The Law by Larry Cohen Bridge at The Edge by Boye Brogeland & David Bird and several more... Thinking bridge is a necessity for improvement. I also looked at how experts are playing these days by Making a copy of many top pairs convention cards to see how they combine things including their defensive methods. Thank goodness for BBO making this possible. So whatever your interest you will find the right path!