AL78

Yes, I live in weak NT land, and I picked up that possible method of interfering over a transfer from one of my bridge books.

The other downside of transferring is that you give opponents more options to bid. After 1NT - (P) - 2♥, LHO can cue 2♠ to show a TOX hand short in spades, and have pass followed by double as penalties. Similarly RHO can TOX after the transfer is completed with short spades and strength. One of the very strong players at my club disliked weak takeouts after a penalty double of 1NT for that reason, it gives the opponents more options.

I might look at the travellers at my club to find out how frequently 1NT-1 was a top, and I suspect not very often. It may be true if you play in a club full of expert players who will always compete against a 1NT opening when it is right, and silly results due to randomness are minimised. I don't think it is true in general in the very mixed ability clubs that are the norm, here a novice going one down in 1NT will be a near bottom if others are making 8 tricks in the same contract.

I dislike West's bid even more.

I don't play 2/1 so I would bid J2N with that hand.

My local bridge club is re-introducing a F2F evening session, and the decision at the committee meeting was to keep the online session in parallel, play the same boards in the two sessions, and merge the two sessions into one when scoring so the final result is as if there was only one session. My question is, is this likely to introduce any bias in the results, given that if there were two Mitchell movements for example, half the EW pairs will not play half the NS pairs, and if there is a difference in strength between the club and online sessions, some players will play against a greater proportion of stronger players which will make it harder to do well? I know that in a big EBU event like the Brighton congress this effectively happens (it is impossible for everyone to directly play everyone sitting the other way), but I expect in that situation the mean and variance of the standard of the subset of the direct opposition anyone plays against at their table is going to be very similar.

As far as I'm aware you have to place well in events to earn BBO points. To place well you and your partner have to play well or get lucky, or you have to play in a field that is well below you in ability. I think I've only got about three points despite being on BBO since the start of the pandemic, that is because I am a poor player.

Open 1NT. The high intermediates compensate for the ♠QJ doubleton, which might not be useless depending on what partner holds in the suit.

Yes I did, sorry, in that case the raise is standard.

I think there was a considerable element of luck in your partner's bid, so I would not be so quick to congratulate him/her. Would you congratulate them if you held a singleton club and four diamonds and you were writing -500 on your card, which is the sort of thing that would happen if I bid like that? We have a few players at my club who bid like that and seem to land on their feet when the cards are aligned in such a way that it works perfectly. With one of my partners, 3♣ would show 5-5 both minors so I would open that.

Shouldn't a major suit transfer followed by a minor show a hand with mild slam interest?

With my partners I play new suits as one round forcing, as if there were no double.

I have a loosely related question. If you are in a slam which is virtually certain to be bid by everyone else, you have a simple finesse in one side suit, and a two way finesse in another side suit, at MPs, should you do an elimination play and play A then Q in the first suit, endplaying whichever defender wins to save you a guess for the 12th trick, or should you take two finesses and go for 13 tricks, going off if both finesses fail? Example: BridgeMaster level 3 A6.

1♥ - (1♠) - 2♣ - (2♠) 2NT Can't 2NT show a balanced hand outside your 1NT opening range with a spade stop, or if 2NT isn't natural, how do you show this hand?

"IMHO, the main way to keep our game going and growing is by getting retirees to take it up." That is already being achieved by the structure of duplicate being as hard as possible for young people to play. If something is optimised for retired people, you shouldn't be surprised when you get mostly retired people participating. If bridge moves online permanently and replaces F2F bridge, I will give up the game. The physical social interaction is a big part of the enjoyment of bridge. Take that away and I will find something to do in the evenings that involves having in a social life. I work in front of as computer for 8+ hours a day, why would I want to sit in front of it for another three hours straight after?

Is it really necessary to keep bollocking your partner after they accepted they made a mistake?

Some people play this showing a good raise, with direct raises being LOTT competitive. It depends on whether a new suit opposite an overcall is forcing or not. If it is, you can use the cue bid to ahow a good hand with support (almost) all the time. If it is not, the cue bid has to cover cases where you have a good hand with possible game on but no support.

Expecting a constructive slam investigation, I was surprised by the unilateral decision by partner that 6♠ was the place to play knowing little about my hand other than it isn't rubbish. I had a think about what partner could have to place the contract like this, and thought about bidding the grand, but eventually decided that if 6♠ was there, 6NT should be there as well, so bid it. This was the complete board: https://tinyurl.com/y9o4s47a I won the opening lead and claimed the rest. I couldn't help thinking it would have been better to probe in the auction and maybe find out the grand is good, but 6NT got us a decent score with all but one other in spades. Strangely, the two who found 7♠ went off although if South plays it I can't see how.

3♠ is what I bid, this should show some slam interest (at the very least better than minimum) and invite partner to cue bid. Partner responds with 6♠. [hv=d=s&v=0&b=11&a=2dp2hp2sp3sp6sp]133|100[/hv] Over to you.

I responded 2♥ (I wondered if anyone would consider 2NT). The auction proceeds: [hv=d=s&v=0&b=11&a=2dp2hp2sp]133|100[/hv] What now?

24 HCP.

MPs, playing 5CM, strong NT, Benji 2 level openings (2♣ = 8PT or strong balanced, 2♦ = Acol style GF). ♠JT3 ♥KJ4 ♦KQJ6 ♣873 Partner opens 2♦ GF, opponents are silent. Your agreement is 2♥ is a relay, saying nothing about your hand, giving opener a chance to clarify theirs. A discussion on what new suits and 2/3NT mean hasn't come up. Your bid.

Yes, partner has three viable options, pass, 3NT and 4♠. Two of those work, she chose the third one.

I was undisciplined and loathe to pass this hand, so took a risky double. It didn't work and I got my deserved bad score. https://tinyurl.com/ydyt5was

I decided to bid what I thought had a fair chance of making or if I go down, maybe they can make 4♠, and give the opposition the last guess, so bid 4♥. 73% to us when they bid on and went down. https://tinyurl.com/ycwtw2vc