luis

1) 4♦ pick a major. 2) 6♥ in freak hands is really about taking the best guess

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sq92h4dakqt63ckj5]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You open 1♦ and pd bids 1♠ now what? 2♠ ? 2♦? 3♦? 3♥(spl)? 4♦? 3♠? Luis

It was bound to happen one day, and it did now: I agree with Luis! ;) Roland :-))

1♣ Automatic

What I think : 2NT, 3♣ and 3♠ are not forcing. 3♦ and 3♥ are forcing.

3♠ I'm quite comfortable with 3♠

I have a lot of simphaty for the 3♣ bid. I don't know what I would do at the table, pass and 3♣ are my options and I think it would be a table-based decision.

I think I agree with the TD. I think there's enough to assume East was bidding badly on purpose, he might have even enrolled as a sub to disturb the tournament results. Playing Face 2 face bridge there's no infraction but in F2F bridge there're no subs and if a player intentionally distorts the results he is subject to a disciplinary measure by the ethics comitee. In this case the TD acted as the ethics comitee and removed the sub. Adjusting the board seems to be a sensible decision and I think I agree in all you did. Luis

You passed originally. You can't have that hand if you bid 2♥ over 1NT. Also, pard's 3♠ is mildly encouraging to 4♠. If he thought 4♥ was going down, he shouldn't have bid 3♠. (See Robson's book..) Pd has other ways to invite. A raise is always just competitive.

Another vote for Rock/Alternative/Punk here :-) While playing I think "Sugar we are going down" will become a classic here at home :-)

I'm surprised nobody objected the 3♦ bid. I think the correct bid is 3♠ you show values in spades, support for diamonds and you allow pd to sacrifice in 4♠ if he has 4 cards in spades. I think the 2♦ bid at this vul can be oriented to look for a sacrifice so I bid 3♠ suggesting a 4♠ sacrifice and a hand not sure about the merits of 5♦ (otherwise I would have bid 4♠). Luis

You should nominate your auction for the most annoying auction of the year :-) The prize will be given to the sucessful auction that got the opponents more furious. I nominate the following: 1♦ - 1♥ - 1♠ - 4♣* pass - pass**- pass *** * = Fit-showing (Heart support and clubs) ** = When the 1♥ overcaller passed 4♣ the 4♣ bidder looked at the sky like saying "why is this happening to me?" *** = This player considered bidding for some time while his pd looked at him very serious as if saying "don't you see they are going to play something silly?" Result: 4♣ down 1, 4♥ can't be made, the opponents have 4♠ This is now called as the "missunderstanding gambit" :-)

We've been using the "comic" 1♠ overcall here against 1♣ for some time and I must tell you it has worked quite well for us. The opponents frequently getting confused about when doubles are for penalties and when not and about when spades are spades and when they are not etc. I think that if you are allowed to overcall 1♠ = 13 cards against a strong club then there's something to let the 1♣ opener psyche his 1♣ opening randomly. This will counter the effect of 1♠ since you can be ruining your constructive bidding as well as the opponents bidding. Just a thought.

Roland This two questions are very difficult. I think pass is a logical alternative to 4♥. I don't think it is a good bid but I think it is a logical alternative. After 4♥ and 5♣ again I think pass is a logical alternative to 5♣ and the 6♣ bid may have been influenced by the hesitation before 3NT. I'm not absolutely sure just saying what I think.

Yes you were robbed. Not only that I find the ruling insulting. Let's assume you were indeed concealing a partnership agreement -I'm sure you were not-, even then the 3♦ bid is not a result of the concealed information and I would let the table result stand and maybe use a procedural penalty on your side for not properly alerting and disclosing your special agreement. Take it easy anger management when the TD imposes an incredible ridiculous ruling is one of the skills you will need as a bridge player.

Agree but this does not seem like the hand for a spec X. You know everything is splitting and if declarer has someting like a stiff heart (not unlikely) opp the KJT (not unlikely) the ruffing fineeses will work etc. You should at least have some kind of surprise for a spec X, like a stiff trump. Agree this is not the hand.

If you intended the double as asking for a heart lead then I think it was bad, there's no reason to think you need a heart lead to defeat 4♠, if declarer has some heart losers where is he going to discard them? I think the bidding asked for a trump lead and doubling risks pd leading something else so I would just be quiet since I like the normal lead suggested by the bidding. I also want to mention that I have a different view about "speculative" doubles than many other players, for some players any doubled game that is made means the double was a bad double I disagree with that approach, from time to time I think it is fine to double if you think the contract is not going to be easy to make. Luis

What do you do with three suiters with no 5 card major? we use 2♦ as 10-14 3 suiter always with clubs. 2♥ weak 2 in hearts OR 10-14 3 suiter short in clubs (always has 4 hearts) Since both show one 4 card suit they are legal openings in most scenarios.

To add some references In our NBO opening in transfer is considered satanic and illegal, they can burn you alive for doing it so we use a version of Moscito called "german moscito" that modified openings to make them more legal under normal circunstances. 1♣ 15+ 1♦ 10-14 no 4 card major 1♥ 10-14 4+ hearts 3- spades 1♠ 10-14 4+ spades 3- hearts 1NT balanced 11-14 2♣ 10-14 both majors at least 5/4

If you assume that pulling one card a a time can be cheating then I think it is quite a stupid way of cheating since it is very evident. Do you also see if players pick the cards with the right or left hand? Do they eat candies while playing? When? Can a TD forbid you from eating candies? Forbid you from holding your head with your hand? Can they forbid women from touching their hair? As long as what you do is not unlawful you could ban a lot of stupid things if you fear cheating through secret communications.

We had once an incident where a 6♠ bid didn't pass the tray and 6♥ reached the other side ending in a fouled board. I usually pick the cards in the conventional way because I don't want to sort the cards back in the bidding box. But when we play with screens and the cards are plastified I pick one at the time because otherwise you have a problem with the screen. I can't even imagine what this opps and Td would say if they know I use plastified cards in a different way than normal cards!!

Thanks for the names Justin I asked the TD exactly what you said, where in the laws it says it is illegal to bid this way? He said "I'm sure it is somewhere" he also told us we had to bid in the way he said or he would start 3imp penalties per board we played bidding unlawfully. The opponent refused to pass the tray unless pd bids had all the lower denomination cards placed behind. I kindly asked my pd to bid in the way the TD asked us to bid and then find if somewhere will have to write us an apology or if we should write them an apology instead. Of course I called the TD when I was about to open 1 club asking him if that would cost me 3 imps since there was nothing below 1 the 1 club card, in such a case I would open something else. I also asked if the opponents besides telling us how to bid and play a system without a Cc had other rights that I should know. In short words I'm so obfuscated :-)

First of all because it's not ethical to announce "Undiscussed" out loud. The second problem was that 5♦ was alerted. Then I think you can't bid 5♦ and alert without telling pd if you are answering blackwood or picking your best minor. The explanation "depends on what 4NT is" doesn't make any sense. I mean if you don't know what 4NT is and pd doesn't know what 5♦ is what the hell is going on ?

Do you want to have some fun? Yesterday my pd and I played f2f bridge against one of our internationalist pairs, in fact a pair that will play the bermuda bowl for our country in October. The following auction occurred: me Int1 pd Int2 3♠ - 4♥ - 4♠ - 4NT At this point Int2 in my side of the screen told in a loud voice "This is uniscussed" without even alerting or anything. I raised an eyebrow, bid pass and passed the tray. me Int1 pd Int2 pass - 5♦ - pass - 5♥ In his side of the screen pd asked Internationalist number 1 about the 5♦ bid, the conversation was: Pd: "What id 5♦?" Int1: "Depends on what 4NT is" Pd: "And what is 4NT?" Int1: "Can be blackwood or two suiter" Pd: "And which one it is?" Int1: "I don't know" Pd: "And how can you then bid 5♦?" Int1: "....." Pd: "Please tell me" Int1: "....." The hand ended in 5♥ making, I felt abused and insulted for both the behavious and the incredible explanations. Up to now I can't determine if they are short of grey matter and really think what they explained or if they are just bad people trying to confuse opponents.

This is the Story: My pd and I have played together for more than 10 years. My pd likes to pick only one card from the bidding box each time he bids because he says he is more confotable in that way. This means that when he bids 3NT he only places the 3NT card on the table or the tray, without all the lower denomination cards. He always does that never changing the way he uses the bidding box. He thinks Bocchi does the same, we are not sure. In a recent tournament an opponent called the TD saying it was unlawful to use the bidding box in this way. The TD ordered us to use the bidding box in the way the other players did because "somewhere the rules say so". I was very obfuscated so now I'm trying to determine if this is lawful or unlawful, if the TD can rule about this etc etc. So your opinion and understanding about this is welcome, if you have friends who are experts in the laws please ask them. Thanks for any feedback. Luis