luis

1♦ - p - 1♠ p 1N - p - 2♣ - p 2♠ - 3♥ - 4♣ - p 4♥ - p - 4N - p 5♥ - p - 6♠ -p p - p I really don't see the problem, 4♣ looks automatic.

1NT may not be my #1 option but I won't say it's horrible. Maybe 3♦ or even 1♥ are better options to 1NT. After that I don't know why 5♦ and not 4♦ Anyway it wasn't really horrible there're a lot of worst auctions :-)

I did made an insufficient bid on purpose once, playing with screens we started a relay auction and my screenmate told me (I always pass, I don't care about this crazy system you play, just move the tray). So I asked everything I could up to the level of 5c passing the tray while my LHO was just sitting there, over 5c I bid 3NT and passed the tray, LHO had to accept that :-) There was some action after this with the TD quite confused about what happened but finally the conclusion was that 3NT was an accepted insufficient bid and that my opponent learned a lesson :-)

Over 1NT Keri by Ron Klinger (the new version) is really great, Easy to remember, easy to handle and better than the normal transfers+guess what approach. If you are serious about system I'd recommend you to just take a look at Keri. Pls note that the book uses the old version.

3♠ for me too, I hate bidding 5m when we may have 4, 6 or 7.

1) What do you bid and why? I bid 3♣ I can't bid 2NT and 3♣ is teh cheapest bid I have. 2) Would 2NT by east have been a one round force instead of 2S? No, 2NT is not forcing to me 3A) Is 2S game force? Yes 3B) If yes, what do you respond with AKXX=AXXXX=XX=XX 2NT 4) What hand type do you think 3C should show by W? This one :-)

The big problem of opening 4 of a minor when pd is not a pssed hand is that you can no longer play 3NT and with a long minor 3NT is many times your best game. Having said that hands with 8 cards and a very broken suit are quite ideal for a 4m opening since the chances of 3NT being the best contract are greatly reduced. In the example you present I think 4d is a valid option and West just went nuts with 4NT, 4m minor openings should be fairly destructive and that's why west is very far from holding a hand that can act over 4d. Luis

i believe this is probably true, which helps explain why so many people aren't afraid to enter auctions with crap I don't think the exctintion of penalty doubles is related to the level of agressiveness in overcalls. People overcall more just because they are more agressive not because they can't be doubled. Playing takeout doubles you can still make penalty passes and convert pd doubles to penalties.

I totally DISagree, luis. disaster is one thing, ignoring partner is another. I believe (almost) all top players have some kinds of unwilling mistakes. By passing a forcing bid he means, "partner, I have better judgement than you do. Even this is 100% forcing, but I don't believe you". Bridge is not all about winning, it's more about partnership. No, passing a forcing bid is really a partnership bid, it's saying "I know this is wrong but I believe I must pass and I know you will forgive me". There's a very good quote to explain this action: "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right"

luis, this may be true but does partner stop opening his (supposedly) forcing 2♣ with a balanced 25 count because his partner, being focused, concentrated, and trying to win, decides to pass? one would expect the 2♣ bidder to be trying to win also, and focused and concentrated enough to at least open 2♣ Pd passed your forcing 2♣ bid, do you expect him to that again? Once he did it's done, next hand. You should keep playing normal, when pd does something unexpected and very strange trying to get a result you shouldn't be worried.

Takeout, penalty doubles are an endangered bid, will be extinct soon.

An UNWILLING mistake may happen to anyone, even world class. Everybody can get tired, and it is good partnership to account for some slips by pard, no matter how bad. A WILLING ignoring of a partnership agreement is much more than that. (Sorry Wayne, I do not mean to blame you, it is just the issue of such kind of bids, I know you, hope you do not get me wrong... :unsure: ) This is SUBSTANTIALLY different and is often a sign of turning a partnership game into a solo game, a choice made by anyone who decides to pass a forcing bid by looking only at his cards.... Disagree, An unwilling mistake is a distraction, something that shouldn't happen in a good level partnership, distractions can cost many imps and are product of a loss of concentration, a good player must try to focus and keep concentration, unwilling mistakes are a disaster. On the other hand willing mistakes are things you do with the intention of winning and may or may not result but show you are focused, concetrated and trying to win.

Yes, specially with all those nice shiny doubles in the middle :-)

My view is: Pass is wrong because 2♣ is forcing, so when a bid is forcing pass is wrong. Sometimes a wrong bid can be succesful as in this example. What I don't like are the posts saying things like "lose your pd", "won't play with you anymore", etc etc. You guys are spoiled people, you need to play with my pd some seasons and you will become more friendly, more open and a better pd. If my pd passes 2♣, then I play 2♣ and if it was right it was right and if it was wrong it was wrong, I wouldn't make a single comment since pd knows that what he did is wrong but I won't trash him for trying to win and I really welcome some creative decisions from time to time. Even when passing 2♣ lead to disaster the partnership is in a better state, you can't have a better pd than a pd that doesn't say anything when you pass his strong 2♣ opening.

Justin, you mean you will never try to penalize opps in this sequence if you have 1-4-4-4 and invitational+ values ? Is it either 3NT or 3H undoubled and never defend 3H doubled ? I have to admit I'd find this rather surprising, but I am no expert so I won't argue further... B) I'm also passing and will bid 3NT over pd reopening dbl so I'm in a 100% agreement with Justin. My reasons may differ so let me explain you why I do this and it may be interesting to know if Justin has different or similar motives. In my partnerships we are encouraged to open light, a 1s opening can be specially light since we try not to pass when we have spades, if you can stablish a spade fit early the auction can be very difficult for your opponents. Since we don't play penalty doubles when opener is short in the suit they overcall opener is forced to reopen with a double even with a light hand since I could have passed with a very strong hand when I have their suit. So we tend not to make a penalty pass of the reopening double when we really don't have strong holding in their suit and there's a good alternative. In this hand 3NT may or may not make and 3h may or may not make but I'm sure that playing 3N is a safer alternative than leaving 3h doubled. This the sort of compromise you have to make when you have the style I describe.

Pass but if pd reopens with a double I will bid 3NT.

So much agreement is disgusting so I will disagree with you Justin. First of all I can't imagine what else can you have as a passed hand so I don't understand how your hand can be "not good enough" Second: Do you really think that at MPs pd will remove 1NT when he has 4 clubs or 4 hearts? If you have a balanced hand then he will probably want to play 1NT with many 5422 hands, some 5431 hands and all 5332 hands. There're many chances of missing a much better contract and even a game bidding 1NT. I respect a lot the 1NT bidders at MPs but I think it's too creative, even when 2c leads to a bad result it will be probably average since 2♣ is a pedrestrian bid while 1NT is a "I'm a MPs wizard" bid. Bah, it's fun to disagree I really wouldn't mind that much if my pd bid 1NT on that collection, specially when I'd bid 2♣, it's nice to know you get different results depending on who is north and who is south, makes the game more spicy.

If anyone needs a fluent spanish spoken guide that can play some bridge and wants to help a third world poor dude like me with the trip I'd be glad to go :-) :-)

I bid 2♣, maximum passed hand with a club suit. I'm interested in clubs or hearts we may have a fit in any of those suits. Is this really complicated? :-)

Wow, I almost echoed Fred's comments word by word. I have to consider retirement now that I did something well :-)

funny you think a lead from Qxxx is more likely to blow a trick than from KTx? Probably but it certainly will be more difficult to understand for pd.

Heart Ten unblocking the suit, the spade suit seems to be the best way to blow a trick a close decision between a heart and a club.

I double, and lead the dA, maybe they make it but I'm honest and do what I know I would do at the table. Without the s9 I think I would pass.

The Viking structure: 1M - 1NT Now: 2c = Maximum 2d = Min, side minor 2h = Min, Balanced or both majors 2s = Min, One suited hand 2N = Min, 6-4 hand 6M-4m 3c = Max 5-5 relay asks 3d = Max 5-5 relay asks 1M - 1NT; 2d - 2h relay 2s = Clubs 5-4 relay asks distribution (5422,5431,5413) 2n = Diamonds 5-4 relay asks distribution (5422,5431,5413) 3c = Clubs 5-5 relay asks distribution (5521, 5512, 5530, 5503) 3d = Diamonds 5-5 relay asks distribution (5521, 5512, 5530, 5503) 1M - 1NT; 2h - 2s relay 2N = Balanced 5332 relay asks for doubleton 3c = Both Majors 6-4 relay asks 3d = Both majors 5-5 relay asks 3h = Both majors 5422 3s = Both majors 5431 low singl 3n = Both majors 5431 high singl 1M - 1N; 2s - 2N relay 3c = 6322 relay asks tripleton 3d = 6331 low singl 3h = 6331 midl singl 3s = 6331 high singl 3N = 7222 4c = 7321 low singl 4d = 7321 high singl 1M - 1N; 2N - 3c relay 3d = clubs 3h = diamonds 1M - 1N; 2c (Max) 2d relay 2h = Max, both majors or balanced 2s = Max one suited 2N = Max 6M-4m 3c = Max 5M-4c 3d = Max 5M-4d *symettric to the previous bids* This is the original structure, as posted I changed the meaning of 1M-1N;2c to show a hand that a human being wouldn't open the others then show a normal opening. After 1M-1N;2c-2d is still the GF relay and we keep system on. Luis

How can you vote? I can't believe it. I think this problem depends 100% on partnership style so it's not really a judgment problem. I did vote but I strongly objected the problem.