luis

Result stands, seems to be easy. I doubt this is a MI case but even If there was missinformation then the damage wasn't caused by the MI. Luis

Hi Barmar, When the idea came to my mind I didn't check other threads so I won't claim this to be my original idea :-) I think your idea (and later mine) would make money bridge more attractive to good players since as long as you use your cards more effectively than your opponent you rate to win. As it is a bad player can get a couple of cold vulnerable games and leave with some money for doing exactly nothing. Luis

Let's say you open a money bridge table, then another person joins to play 1 on 1. what about putting the players in the same position with a gib pd against gib robots to play exactly the same hand? Then you compute IMPs and pay based on $0.1 per imp to $2 per imp. In this way who gets the cards doesn't matter. Luis

I would rate 4♣ "R"

Diamond FIT ! I think that if opener bids 3♦ as a super-acceptance it is because he has diamonds, so 3NT is the only way to show we have a double fit and the 4-4 or 5-4 diamond fit might be better than the 5-4 spade fit. Now RKCB is 6 aces RKCB since we have two fits. Luis

3♣ spades may not run and I want pd to lead a club if we get overbid. After pd bids something I will bid 4♠ Luis

First question: Did you sleep? Very difficult problems, I would hate to face all this problems at the table in the same tournament. 1NT, diamonds are quite bad for a 2d overcall and pd has forgiven me for having a singleton heart before. I plan to compensate the missing heart with extra strenght. If you want to flame my bid I must say I'm not very proud of it either. I'm feeling excruciating pain deciding between 3NT and double. The reason for 3NT is that it automatically right-sides 3NT and if pd has the cQ or an entry I may be able to run 9 tricks quickly. Bad things that can happen: that they can run many diamonds and that 3NT is down with 4s making. I'm bidding 3NT but I will LOVE somebody to run a simulation to check what is better here (PLEASE PLEASE!) Double, value-showing without 3 spades. Clear description of what I have. Pass. I can't think I'm being robbed in all the boards :-) 6 hearts, if doubled I will run to 6s. Pd will lead a heart if they bid 7. So cute, so cute :-). Luis

Isn't a 3♥ fit jump also showing 2 of the 3 features? And when I bid clubs the next time around, won't partner imagine me having a void? I think that showing diamondfit + club void is better than showing diamondfit + heart suit here. At least you will know inmediately if you can play 6 or 7 when pd answers the exclusion RKCB. Luis

I bid 5♣ exclusion RKCB directly over 2♣ The reason is that I need to get information quick because they might be in 5♣ soon and the best thing I can do to show a strong hand with a club void and diamond support is to bid 5♣ now, if pd shows 2 keycards I will bid 7, if he shows 1 I will bid 6. Having the trump queen in hand is nice. The problem bidding hearts is that it will be impossible to say I have diamond support and a club void and a heart suit in this auction so I choose to show 2 of the 3 features. Luis

Depends on agreements, without any special considerations I would say it is not forcing. 3♣ seems wrong because responder doesn't have a sixth club and 3♣ risks being passed out, I think with a balanced 5332 of 18hcp a 4NT bid over 2NT is absolutely clear. There is no need to bid 3♥ as if you had an unbalanced hand when you have 5332, for the same reason there is no need to bid 3♣ Luis

I am against this :P Except for the very best, most vuegraph commentators make too many double-dummy comments already in my opinion. Of course not everyone can be Michael Rosenberg, but I much prefer when the commentators try to figure out how the play in 4S should go, rather than telling how to make it double dummy, and then trying to figure out whether that line is realistic etc. Arend Precisely, If we can see what is makeable double dummy commentors can focus more in the single dummy analysis of the deal which is a lot more interesting. And sometimes it will help find nice squeezes or plays that are hard to see while doing many things at the same time. Luis

Excuse me, but what's the point of mentioning Namyats if you don't explain what it shows? >>I would open 4♣ (namyats) and take my chances of missing a slam vs them not finding the spades<<, Luis says. Does he explain what Namyats implies, or should one expect that beginners and/or intermediates know? I don't think so. Roland Yes I might have dropped a line or two about what Namyats are. In a short form a strong version of the 4♥/4♠ openings in 4♣/4♦. The exact requirements and continuations vary per partnership agreements the idea is to be able to open at the 4 level with either weak hands (preempts) or not so weak hands, this makes interference harder. We may open a thread in this forums to discuss Namyats and the different styles we play, can be an instructive thread I think. Luis

I like Vugraph a lot the way it is and I'm sure Fred has a list of improvements to make it even better so I'm not very worried. One small suggestion is to display the double dummy analysys of the deal on a side so you can see makeable contracts, this will help a lot the commentators and the kibitzers, for example if 4s is makeable we may discuss how to do it, if it is realistic single dummy etc. Luis

Actually you were the reason I put the disclaimer, and I see it did its job admirably. Consider yourself preempted :) This 'funny system' is played by more than 99.9% of pairs in the USA. Of course, that doesn't mean it isn't funny, but no one here would think it is. Well, I can play within the quidelines set,,, the usual problem is "how would you bid it" and then when I give my auction, it is, you can't bid that way. The funny system part referred to the lack of any two suited bid (unusual 2NT, michaels cue bid). If you want to block my 1NT shows spades and other minor, all you had to say was 1NT would be natural. That wouldn't be a funny system. That would be what 99% of the people play. But I seriously (very seriously) doubt 99.9% of the people play no bids over 1♣ show two suiters. I would say it is probably closer to the other way around. DANGER DANGER ! :-)

I have to strongly disagree what with you say. "This is the beginners and Intermediate Bridge discussion Namyats don't belong here" Do you think that beginners and ints are stupid? The fact that they are learning does not mean they can't understand what Namyats are or what we are discussing, it just means they are still in their learning process and may not know as many things as experts or not have enough experience. I hate it when somebody dismisses an idea because the target are beg/ints, they are capable enough to know what they can understand and what they can't, if this is too advanced they can bookmark it and ignore and read it a few months later. If they can understand it then why not let them read ? Who are you to decide what a B/I can understand and what they can't ? Even world champions were B/I at one point in their bridge lives, what you know and what you CAN learn are completely different things. No offense please but be careful when you say such a thing. Luis