DozyDom

It's a misdescription of their methods if they do this habitually, and I'd guess they do because most people who play that weak twos could be 5 cards at some vulnerabilities don't stick to strict point counts. Either way, is the North hand the right one to make a take-out double on? If that wasn't take-out, is the South hand really the right one to pull a penalty double? I'd say the answers are both no - no adjustment is needed because NS have done themselves in, whereas the EW bidding should have got them to a hopeless game.

I fail to see why a charge would be more discouraging to cheats than to other players.

It's about making a 2D opening show diamonds - how much more natural do you want?

And what's more, it was left to the South hand to double.

Call me lazy, but I'm not inviting. I'm at mps and I'll take my plus in 3D. Then again, perhaps my partners have less sound overcalls than some of you.

My copy of Fantunes Revealed tells me that a 2M rebid after the 2/1 response shows a one-suiter, which by elimination must include 5332 15-17 hands given that they aren't included in the other rebids.

Now, now, pre-empt? It meets the rule of 20...

Isn't it N's responsibility to ensure the correct boards are being played/to enter the correct board number in the Bridgemate? That's the way I've always heard it, and it would lead to N/S getting an average minus. In which case it's very convenient for the director that they misrecalled the law.

The op says partner hesitated for an entire minute. The stop card is irrelevant. And calling the director before making your bid tells all your opponents that you have a very close call to make, even after having more than a minute to think about it. I don't really understand your point about a flash pass - surely op would mention if it wasn't in tempo in the original situation.

The hand isn't strong. The bid is. Question answered, boom. Partner has come in at the 4 level opposite a passed hand, you have AKA and 3-card support. 5!D looks extremely conservative. Pass looks inexplicable.

Unless my mathematical knowledge has deserted me in the last few weeks since A-levels, average and aggregate scores will give exactly the same ranking no matter what. As for discounting the worst night, it seems like it wouldn't make a huge difference to anything, but it might lead to less technical bridge being played on the third evening - those lagging behind in the competition might be encouraged to create swings to get ahead, knowing that if the swings don't go their way it won't affect their standings. Not sure if that would actually happen though. Seems more like a matter of taste than anything else. Giving people points for their placing seems more likely to create draws, which seems undesirable.

You've misread the sequence, I think - we're sitting under the diamond length.

As far as I'm aware, they're not, no. Oops. I was trying to think of some reason why the 9 might be considered as a lead.

Assuming (probably safely) that you are playing roughly standard leads: If they're playing precision and the 1♦ is nebulous (or some other system with a nebulous diamond), I'm leading the KD. It would look like the best lead by far. I'm guessing that isn't the case though. Instead, I'll lead the 6 of clubs. 4th highest from longest and strongest suit obviously doesn't always work out; I could be leading towards declarer's KJ or something. But it's less likely to blow a trick when I'm holding Q10 than just the bare queen, and much more likely to establish tricks. I'll be honest, I normally stop thinking around that point because the other leads just look unappetising. Leading trumps could be right, but normally only when it'll cut down on declarer's ruffs - there's no evidence of that here, and it could easily blow a trump trick for my partner. Leading a diamond seems likely to help set up dummy's suit. And leading a spade will be questionable at best - leading the 9 as MUD will look obscenely like a doubleton, leading the 4 will look like low from 4 of them, and leading the jack will either look like I have the 10, or like I have a doubleton again. That's not to say a low club will work. I just think it'll work more often than other leads.

I'm not sure why anyone's complaining about the original SJS - they are supposed to include massive balanced hands, that's just part of the method. Complain to Soloway, not to GIB.

East's bidding here is so over-the-top in its understatement of the hand's strength that I'm almost suspicious you're posting this as West to attract harsh comments towards your partner... Given that your example hand for a minimum 4♥ is much better than a 50% slam (unless I'm not paying enough attention), I think the 90% East is rather too kind.

It can't ask you for a heart control at that point, so it's guessed.

To be honest, I don't really mind this. The hand fits the criteria for a strong jump shift - the massive balanced hand type - but I suspect 3NT is the only bid available there to show a strong balanced hand type, and I'd guess GIB's definition for 3NT isn't quite strong enough for such an exceptional 20-count. 4C, meanwhile, really isn't so vast a lie, and allows plenty of space for opener to describe his/her hand to investigate which strain - diamonds, clubs, spades, or NT - is best.

You have a partial stop in spades and 5 quick tricks (plus the queen of spades) between you. 3NT goes down on the actual layout if W continues spades, (as it probably should) and it's actually quite a nice one, with W having only 4 spades. Why so eager to be in 3NT? The robot is definitely making bad bids here, but that's because it's massively overvalued its hand due to a singleton in your suit, not because it should be bidding to game even faster. Of course, I'd say it should be bidding 3C over 2C, and that's also a terrible contract to be in.

I don't have a clue how it's justifying its bid, but I think it's bidding to make, and passed originally because it wanted to play in 4SX.

...isn't it just a balancing takeout double, made with less values than an immediate one? As for the robot's response, well, that's Gib being Gib.

But which of them should make the sacrifice? Surely not E, given his defence and balanced shape. And surely not West, whose partner did nothing after his open, and didn't interfere even after the opponents started bidding. For all West knows, 7C goes off 6 vulnerable for -1700. It certainly isn't hard to construct hands for W where this occurs, and it would be a terrible score.

This is actually quite an interesting problem, simply because it's so unproblematic. Given the hand and bidding sequence in the OP, I'd raise to 3NT without a second thought. Given it as a single dummy problem, with the N hand included, and... I still raise to 3NT. Given it as a double dummy problem, and knowing the slam is makeable... I still don't bid it. At least one of my regular partners thinks I'm too reckless in slam bidding. The other believes I'm a shifty person. I have no reason to make the former mistrust me in slam auctions for the next two months, and I have even less reason to make the latter believe that I've been sneaking looks at my opponents' hands.

... maybe we shouldn't because forcing the bot to lead your suit would be an absolutely ridiculous idea?

I... don't quite get what you're saying with that last part. I'm not the one mocking anyone here, nor do I think I'm showing a lack of imagination. Really, just where is this comment coming from?