coyot

Well, I'm quite happy with textbook approach - but not for the reason of finding a "better" contract (as fearing 1M-dbl- would be passed out) but to show that I am alive and willing to compete. I use the approach that even levels are nonforcing and odd levels are forcing - and it has done me a lot of good - esp. at matchpoints, that is. If you play any sophisticated major raises (bergen, hardy), you can have 1NT (in 2/1 GF style) used for "solid" 2M raise and direct 2M raise as preempt.

I'm probably blind - but don't find anything alertable in the bidding :), that is, unless 2[HE} systematically SHOWS 3 spades along the hearts. Otherwise the bidding seemed perfectly normal and natural (with the exception that I would bid 2♥ straight after 1♠. So, If I were called as a TD, I would probably a) ask EW for system meaning of 2♥ B) adjust ave +- (with EW being the punished side) - because if their 2♥ conveys special information, they failed to alert it in time - and if it does not, they should not alert it. Since I don't know all the rules, I'm not sure under which circumstances the TD can award ave+/- and when he has to consider the likely contract and its outcome (here undoubled 2♥ seems likely.

Agree with the above - strong enough for reverse and it is a good idea to open 1♣ if you want to show 11 cards AND strong hand quickly. If you open 1♠ and hear a forcing 1NT, you now need to jump to 3♣ and still show only 9 cards.

Sure, I didn't mean to say that 6♦ would be played - but you would have a chance or three to stop. The minimal balanced hand would, for first, refuse the slam attemps - and that should be enough to stop in 5♦

I would pass 5♦ doubled. Straight jump to 5 must be a preempt. If it is supposed to be "to play" (as in "to play and make"), how do I tell when I should bid 6♦? (Recommended auction - 1♦-2♦ inverted and the cuebids all the way to 6♦ :-)

I'm new to this - but I just tried partnership bidding with the following options: Random hands Minimum 20 HCP E-W bidding GiBs Dealer N/S The first few boards went OK but then came board 4, where West was supposed to be dealer. Anyway, the GiB froze - but I cannot tell whether the problem was in GiB being frozen itself or the fact that West was dealer when it was set to N/S. If anyone can test and replicate this, will be helpful.

Less optimistic than whom coyot? Haven't seen any optimistic comments so far. I don't know about your other comment either. If partner rebids 3NT, yes then we will end up in 3NT, but I like our chances! If partner bids 3S then I'm afraid that we'll have to bid 4H, what else? Over 3H (unlikely, as partner does not have Hx) we can bid an easy 4H, and over 3D (what's that?) we bid 3H and see what partner will do. Less optimistic that the dog that thinks about 5-6 clubs :). The spade wastage looks very unpromising. Of course, 3NT might make, but I hate playint 3NT with void against p's 6card... he might be void in hearts :-)

I'd be less optimistic... partner probably has 6 useless spades :) Of course I will have to bid 3♣ but unless he bids 3♥, we're likely to end in 3NT and make with some luck...

It gets some support B)... i.e. a lot of people I know play 1M-3NT as 12-15 balanced with 3card support.

Oh, a slight misunderstanding in the bidding... I play 14/30 :-) and I wrongly took the 4NT for regular BW then :) If he has 0 keycards, he still can have spade K, KQJ in one minor and QJ in other minor and Jack of hearts :) - that's 13 HCP and the opener above was 11 HCP :) If he has 1 keycard, 5H is reasonably safe If he has 2 keycards, you still have a likely spade loser along with one ace. If you bid slow, you will be able to find his shape (spade singleton would then make this a good slam) Quote: Hugh Kelsey in his excellent book Slam Bidding defined successful slam when the number of good slams bid by a partnership exceeds the combined total of good slams missed and bad slams bid. What is a good slam? Well any slam offering better than a 50-50 chance of success is a good slam, and should be bid. Now, better than 50:50 is good. 50:50 is borderline. IMP, NonVul: gain of 500 (980 vs 480) against the loss of 500 breaks even IMP, Vul: gain of 750 (1430 vs 680) against the loss of 750 breaks even. Of course, a lot depends on event type - who is at the other table in teams, who is in the field.

OK, sorry to push... but your example suggest that you will rebid the diamonds twice with an empty four-card - which is indeed strange to me.

I was just thinking that. Nonsense. The bidding can be made very, very simple: 1H 4NT 5D 5H pass B) In this particular case, yes. If p. responds with 1 ace, you may still go down on spade finesse - and from your cards, it is quite obvious that you need it unless p has singleton. And a slam that relies on finesse is a bad slam.) (If p. responds with 2 aces, some gadgets to find spade king could be possibly employed - maybe...). In general, this fast bidding will work in "easy" cases. It will stop at 5 with 2 aces with opps, but will not allow you to bid a good slam and avoid a bad one. (And the 11HCP aceless balanced opening stinks :))

You're basically forcing partner into 24HCP no-fit game or suggesting to offer 8xxx in diamonds TWICE??? I don't think the hand qualifies as gameforcing, but even so, if I open 1NT and p transfers and then bids diamonds twice, I'll happily raise him with third honor... I will never expect such a garbage hand :). So, for me the pragmatic bid is 2NT and the expert bid is 2NT as well :). If I occasionally miss 3NT, I don't care. If I very occasionally miss 5♦ that needs a lot of help, I don't care... The example you showed above is about the most optimistic 15HCP hand you could expect and still quite likely fails on a trump lead (and you can BET it will come when opps hear that you don't want to play 3NT :)

Sounds like a good save against 4♠ :-). You gave 2 spades, 1 club, heart king and what else?

You never know. I've seen a ton of people pass with quite good hands (in shape terms). Maybe your LHO has a spade raise that is too weak for 2♠ - and does not want to preempt (in case your side does not play the game) - but might be willing to sacrifice over 4♥ when partner gives him some encouragement... Agree 100%. If you bid Michaels with any 5-5, your p will often have problems. My approach is that your hand should be either weak enough or strong enough that with a reasonably good 8-10HCP, you'll want your partner to either sacrifice or bid a slam B)) If you need reasonably good p to make the game, overcall naturally. either 3♦ or 4♦ bid would be IMHO better. You know you're going to play 4♥ if they let you - but if LHO wakes up and bids 4♠, you want your partner to know what your second suit is. Edit: Back to the first quoted part: What cannon? If your partner happens to have 4card support, you're looking at 1.5-2.5 tricks in your hand. Your p with heart king does not guarantee 2 more tricks.... If you happen to have a diamond fit as well, opps might even make 4♠ doubled :P. And if you choose the forcing pass, your p will be in the dark. Does his Kxxx in diamonds score a trick or not? He will be able to estimate the number of spade losers, but will know nothing about minors... 4♥ shows absolutely NOTHING. 3-4♦ shows 4 more cards...

Then I would suggest a 5MB patch :-) - switch to Firefox :-))). I don't know how many IE-functions are missing in Firefox (never used IE extensively) but I know that there are a lot of functions that Firefox has and IE has not, most of the functions that both have are implemented more securely in FF and there is a ton of extensions available that you can get. (Plus, there is much more user control over what the browser does, and much cleaner configuration...) I don't know what else could be causing the problems.

What exactly does the 3♦ bid convey according to your style? Is it a game-try with willingness to play 3♥ on 5-2 fit? Or it is GF? And do you expect partner to bid 3NT with small diamond doubleton (thinking that you're stopping that suit? Or to bid 4♥ with 3card support and diamond king?

It all depends on meaning of pass. If 3♥ is the weakest bid available, then pass could be used to let partner show his values and 3♦ can then be an attempt to help him with bidding over 4♠. This approach has the advantage (agreement required) that 4thlevel bids are splinters. (These days, people will open very aggresively so the slam could still be possible despite the opponents' opener) If pass is the weakest bid and 3♥ shows good trumps but no game interest, 3♦ is for game-try and 4♦ is for the 5thlevel decisions.

3♦ bid is strange, no doubt about it. Offering 4 spot cards? If partner has 2 hearts and 3 diamonds, I'm now playing the same 3NT but will even less chances to make. Anyway, I just looked at the heart hand well - and I would NOT bid 3NT with it B). 2NT is perfect. I have 9HCP with no fit guaranteed and I don't want to end up in a 3NT on 24 HCP. I trust my partner to correct to 3♥ if he has 3card in hearts and good suit-contract values. I.e. 3 aces and king are an obvious 15HCP correction to 3♥, or an empty doubleton... so I will find 3NT or 4♥ on brute force and I will find 4♥ on most suitable 15HCP hands as well.

Oops, you're right... of course, QB the stopped suit... There is no need to show diamond fit if I want to try 3NT. QB of opps suit shows either game interest with anything or a good raise of overcall. I think that there could not be time if 2♣ did not promise a stopper in this case - so I would use the agreement that over 2 suits, both QB have the same meaning - either just a good raise or a stopper for 3NT (which implies at least doubleton support) - while over 1 suit, it is just a generic force.

Yep... any 15 balanced is worth opening 1NT B). maybe with a few exceptions like having 4432 with Qxx and KJ in the last two suits... but generally when I get 15, I open it. To answer the original question: Since 4♥ needs both red finesses to work, while 3NT has the additional chance to make with club ace onside, I would finesse hearts and then diamonds. If the diamond finesse fails, LHO may still err by playing a club for me (not seeing the queen). If heart finesse fails, I was in a hopeless contract but I don't really care as 4♥ goes down as well.

Perhaps it would be worth organizing within BBO. I know it would be a pain, but a real-life TD could theoretically prepare a set of test-cases, which the wannabe-TDs would have to solve within a short-time period (to disallow research, cheating and cooperation). Any person who would pass this test would be given "BBO-qualified TD" label or such. I guess the test should handle a few typical cases of wrong claims, unexplained bidding, using UI (hesitations) etc. I think that deciding claims is about the hardest part. When you play on BBO and refuse a claim, the declarer then sees your cards and may change his plan to make the contract - and (way back) it happened that the TD refused to adjust - even though the "correct" play was different from the "percentage" play. Those BBO-qualified TDs could possibly be under a stricter scrutiny. I'm thinking about the possibility that BBO would automatically log all chat between TD and his tournament (and possibly his actions). This way, buth abusive players and abusive TDs could be caught and dumped B)

Weak for me as well. I mean, where would you want to "limit-raise" when opps have shown (presumably) at least 16 HCP? If you want to try 5♦ with intention to make, you'll most likely need a shortness in either opps suit - which can be shown by jumping in that suit. In the unlikely cause that you really happen to have a strong hand and want to take a shot at 3NT, cuebid the opps suit that you do not have stopped.

3♦ to show p where my values are. Then I can easily let him decide whether to bid 5♥ over 4♠ or not. (If I bid 4♥ right now and opps end up in 4♠, he has no idea whether to bid or not - and nor do I.)

Dbl. I can see two sure tricks in my hand, one spade is likely - and unless my p has a great hand for offensive, we will be happy for any plus score as making 5♠ seems very unlikely. Especially when you "see" that the opps have had a misunderstanding, they will be playing 5♦ with a likely 7-9card fit in diamonds B). LOTT is clear here. Unless p has 7 spades, it should be fairly safe that if 5♠ makes, 5♦ goes down 3+