Echognome

My understanding is that if you bring a bag onboard a plane and there's no room, they force you to check it in. If this happens, then you do not get charged the check-in luggage. So in my view, it's the rules that are creating the problem as they encourage people to bring all of their luggage onboard. Of course, I agree with everyone that the current situation lends itself to slower boarding and deboarding times.

I have stopped using stayman on 4333 hands awhile ago. The ones that I find somewhat more difficult to judge are the 4432 hands with strength in the short suits. For example, suppose partner opens 1NT (15-17) and you hold the follow hands: 1. ♠xxxx ♥QTx ♦Kxxx ♣AQ 2. ♠KQ ♥xxxx ♦AJx ♣xxxx 3. ♠xxxx ♥Jxxx ♦AQx ♣Kx 4. ♠xxxx ♥Jxxx ♦AKx ♣AQ Etc. Would you use stayman or simply blast 3NT?

I don't know if this was meant to be funny, but it was.

Seems it's not as bad as thought: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-20001840-52.html That seems more like introducing goulash in bridge. Or playing versions where 2 is highest and A is lowest or where you pass your cards to the left. They are amusing, but won't be considered anything serious for the game.

I know it may not be exactly what you are looking for, but playing reverse flannery, as I do in at least one partnership, would make these both forcing for me. With the invite only hand you could double or just decide to stretch and force.

3♣ seems obvious. May have an interesting decision next round if it goes (3♠) back around to us. I think I would double then and hope not to hear a 4♦ call from partner. I vaguely remember the thread Phil and Gwnn are talking about.

http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=18627 It's funny reading post from 3 years ago. I started off on one side and then came to my senses. I think my favorite part of that whole thread was "don't call me dude".

Me Tarzan you Jane -attitude will do nothing good to your chances to do well in the event. At the risk of offending some people, one of the funnier quips I have heard is: Me Tarzan You Jane - Kinky foursome!

Happy Birthday! Hope you have a good one.

One suggestion I have for the ACBL is to not immediately put the bidding cards back in the box after the final pass. It seems so much more sensible to me to leave them out in case there are any questions either by opening leader or opening leader's partner. I know people can remember what happened during the auction if they try, but how much time is saved by putting the cards away right away? What do you think?

I think it's a sign that I'm getting old. I'm telling the same stories... :unsure:

Just to clarify if it wasn't already abundantly obvious, I was East on the hand. My hand matched the description my partner gave as well as our agreement. I didn't think there was any damage caused. It just felt wrong to me that dummy is trying to direct his partner first by asking questions himself and then by instructing his partner to ask them. Then the director comes around and completes the job for him by reminding declarer that she can ask questions.

Did this practice work? Couldn't they ask "What does this bid mean?" even if it wasn't alerted to the same effect? They could, but then they would have a hard time explaining why they asked about an unalerted bid. If it's alerted, they can say "We always ask about alerted bids," even if they don't. I think asking about an unalerted bid is harder, even if the rights for asking extend to all calls. It was also much less likely that they would want to ask about natural call. Edit: And this practice did work a lot better. You may argue that it was bad that we didn't want to take up the fight to accuse them of being cheaters (or at least unethical), but instead tried to avoid the problem by changing systems against them. At the club, I found it wasn't worth the grief from past experiences. The scary part to us was that one of them taught the beginner lessons at the club.

What do you think of the TD reminding declarer that she has the right to ask questions?

In the EBU, I believe we were allowed to play different systems against different opponents. In one of the clubs, we had one pair that we viewed as being... how shall we say it? ... how about that they exercised sharp practices. To explain, it seemed that every time we alerted a bid, if they wanted the lead they'd ask, otherwise they wouldn't. Regardless of how you view that accusation, we didn't want the fight and hassle of arguing it with them. So against them we played "If it's alertable, we don't play it." At the time, that meant that over 1NT, we couldn't play Stayman, since it was alertable. So we carried around 2 convention cards. One for them, one for the rest. We checked with a few TD's who said we were allowed to play that way, as long as we carried two sets of convention cards.

When I played these we played next step ask with responses: Min No Shortage Low Short Middle Short High Short Low 2nd suit Middle 2nd suit High 2nd suit Other than the min, the responses are No LMH LMH, so easy enough to remember. After the min response, responder could relay asking for the same steps. Perhaps this doesn't optimally solve all the questions you may have, but we liked that it was easy to remember. We played other bids were natural and forced through 3M.

Edit: If it's unclear from the subtitle, this took place in the ACBL. I don't remember the exact auction, but let's say East was dealer and the auction went as follows: E - S - W - N P - 1♦ - 1♠ - Dbl; 3♣(A) - 3♥ - Pass - 4♥; All Pass (A)3♣ was alerted by West. South asked West when he alerted and West said "I'm not sure, but I think it shows clubs and spades."* West chooses his lead and puts it face down. North (who is dummy) then asks East "What did the 3♣ call show?" East tells North that he cannot ask questions. North says that South has the right to know the meaning of 3♣. East calls the director. The director reminds North that he has no rights and cannot ask any questions. The director then says to South, "Of course you can ask any questions you like." Thoughts? *E/W are a first time partnership and had discussed "All jumps in competition are fitted." West's uncertainty was over trying to remember what they had discussed.

Our auction went 1NT - All Pass. It crossed my mind to bid "Gambling Stayman", but decided to pass. Partner thought 2♥ would be the normal contract (not sure why) and played for 8 tricks. I didn't watch the play (as I normally try to tune out while dummy) and he made 8 tricks. Sorry I cannot enlighten anyone on the play. But I think we were in Sathya's section, so that accounts for the result.

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=skt9xhajxxxdcaqtx&w=sxhkqxdaqj9xcjxxx&e=saqxxhtxxxdtxxxcx&s=sj87xhxdkxxxck98x]399|300|Scoring: IMP 1♥ - (P) - 1♠ - (2♦); 3♦ - (4♦) - P - (P); 4♠ - AP[/hv] I took a line similar to Fluffy's line 1. However, the 2nd round of clubs was ruffed by East and a diamond was returned. I then changed tack and played for West to be something like Ax xx AQJxx Jxxx. That wasn't a success either. So to change gears, play or defend 4♠ after the lead of the ♦A?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sqxxhaxxdxcakj9xx]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♣ - 1♠; ?[/hv] What's your choice?

Your opponents are a pair that have played for the U.S. in the Bermuda Bowl. [hv=d=n&v=b&n=skt9xhajxxxdcaqtx&s=sj87xhxdkxxxck98x]133|200|Scoring: IMP 1♥ - (P) - 1♠ - (2♦); 3♦ - (4♦) - P - (P); 4♠ - All Pass[/hv] Lead: ♦A Plan the play.

I think most would play 4♦ as a splinter if RHO passed. Whether it's a void splinter or could possibly have a singleton is really up to discussion. Regardless, if 3♦ is a splinter here, then 4♦ must be a void. I personally think it should show the void anyway. With a 5=3=1=4 or a 5=2=1=5, wouldn't we just raise clubs and try to get to 3NT?

It seems the pass brigade is taking charge. I happened to also choose pass. However, I think it's close and a couple of world class players I asked did not choose pass. They said "These are the only colors where it's a problem hand."

and how would 4NT be different over 4♠ after you splintered in ♦ or would 4♦ be natural? I don't think 4♦ would be a splinter, at least in how I play with my partners. We have the rule "In competition, you can only splinter in one of the opponents suits."

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sa7hq5dk984ct9863]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♠ - (2♣) - P - (3♣); Dbl - (P) - ?[/hv] Over to you.