Ant590

1♣ -- 1♠ 2♣ -- 2♥ Non-forcing? Forcing?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=shaj9742d96cqjt74]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] First seat, white, IMPs. Do you open? If so, what? You are *not* playing Lucas Twos -- 2♥ is a "standard" weak 2

Oh, I agree. That would be an awesome addition.

I think the OP was in regards to times given as part of the commentary, rather than the vugraph listings.

I asked about this a while back (http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=31248). Since then I have used a work-around of generating a set of hands with the required constraints and then importing those.

In short, I'm quite a fan of natural interference after a multi-way club. I think your plan to have 1NT show the minors is less useful than 1NT natural and 2NT minors. This is because you'll not often buy the contract at the two-level, and the thought of passing initially with a strong NT hand gives me the shivers. I've often toyed with the idea that over a multi-way club playing natural at the 1-level and using the meaning of 2♣->2♠ as your defence to a weak NT.

I wonder if flash has the ability to "look" what your computer thinks the time is and convert on the fly?

Meanwhile I'm making much more progress with deal. However, it doesn't seem to be able to nestle logical commands. I.e. I can't write a statement like {[spades north]<=4 || {[balanced north]&&[hearts north]==4}} Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

Well, I've had a go with deal and dealer and I'm stuck on them both! In dealer, I can run the file, and I generate 40 hands, but if I add something like -p 100 to the end to try and get more or fewer deals I get a bus error. I'm also unsure of how to run an input file. Help!

Thank you both very much indeed. Out of interest, what program(s) have you used? Is it / are they free? I really feel I should be doing this myself, despite helpful and friendly people such as yourselves coming to my assistance!

Hi, Can someone who knows how to do these things help me determine the following please: I'm looking for the expectation on the length of club suit when 1♣ is opened under the following conditions: (1) 5+ clubs, 11-20HCP, no other 5-card suit (i.e. standard club openings) and (2) all 11-13 balanced hands (including 5♦332 but not 5M332) and (3) all 4♣441 11-20HCP hands and (4) all 17-19 balanced hands (except 5M332 and 5♦332) Thanks in advance Ant.

Yeah, this is exactly the problem we had on the spot. We're playing that if 1♠ is the diamond option, it denies a four card major unless game-forcing. So it boils down to whether 3♠ can be bid on a three card suit. This much is un-discussed. If it promises four then responder has 5+♦4♠ and significant extras. But if it promises four then what is responder meant to do with a maximum balanced hand with three spades... we wanted 1♣ - 1NT to be invitational opposite the 11-13 option, so 1♣-1♠ can contain eleven counts. Then 3NT shouldn't be frivolous, I agree, but our blanket agreement is/was that after a reverse and raise, 3NT is frivolous. That's the extent of our agreements :S

Oooh, by whom? Do you have an ISBN? Is it different from the version on Gerben's page? I'm buying it tomorrow if it is.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=saq854hqxdckqjt62]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] Auction proceeds as follows (opps silent): 1♣[1] -- 1♠[2] 2♠[3] -- 3♠[4] ? [1] Natural, any 11-13bal (inc. 5D332 & 4C441) or 17-19bal (all but 5D332) [2] Transfer Walsh-ish: ♦s or 5-11 balanced [3] Natural F1, confirms 5+♣ [4] Natural, extras (2NT would have been Leb/Ing) What's your poison here then? 3NT (friv)? 4♣ (cue)? 4♦ (cue)? 4♠? 5♦ (exclusion)?

When I learnt SR I learnt from a local player's homegrown notes. They were sufficient but required many Q&A sessions between us. If I were to learn from scratch again I would start with Alan Truscott's Vanilla Symmetric Relay (see http://bridgewithdan.com/systems/), or "Symmetric" by Andrei Sharko (see http://www.geocities.com/gerben47/bridge/). I'm not saying these systems are better than any other, but in terms of explaining the principles I've not seen anything better. (the latter is of publishable quality imho)

I would have been very tempted to show my hand as a stronger overcall, either by making a SJO (but I don't know anyone who plays these any more), or doubling and then bidding spades. Having overcalled 1♠ I now bid 3.

Law 27B1b states (I paraphrase) that the auction continues without further rectification if the changed bid is the same or more precise than the insufficient bid. In both your examples, the changed bid has additional meanings not found in the original (insufficient) bid, so this part of rule 27 does not apply. In your first auction, the "standard" meaning of 2NT is stronger than that of 1NT, so its meaning is not "the same or more precise." The IB is UI to partner. In your second auction 1H - pass - 2H, this usually shows 5-9 with heart support. This meaning is not contained in a 1H opening, so 27B1b does not apply. The IB is UI to partner, but because the 2H bid is the same denomination the auction can continue. If opener has been shown to use the UI then an adjustment is made. In the adjustment the director should try and give the most probable possible outcome had there been no UI, which sounds like the same contract in this case. Hard to tell without the hands though.

It seems to me a split ruling between 3♦x and 3♠x is fair to both sides.

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=saqhkt84dk9cjt853&s=sha9653daqj52ckq9]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] 1♥ -- (pass) -- 2NT -- (4♠) 5♠ -- (pass) -- 7♥ -- all pass Was South too pushy? What types of hand could/should 5♠ be?

I like showing 4M5m and 4M6m via different sequences, so I prefer transfer to a minor and then a new suit as the 4-6, and Stayman then 3m as 4-5

Hey, this is the simple rulings forum... seems like big blue shouting is a little bit of an overkill?

I know that the gnome just sits there and smiles when this situation comes up. I remember sitting opposite and getting quite vocal in my calling for a particular (illegal) card to be played.

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=s9863h43da8764c84]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] Partner deals and opens 3♣. You don't have any specific agreements on your style of pre-empts, but you partner likes to bid. 3♣ - (pass) - pass - (3♥) pass - (4♥) - all pass Partner leads the Jack of Diamonds and dummy comes down with: [hv=d=n&v=b&e=skj42ha52dk953cjt&s=s9863h43da8764c84]266|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] ♦J, K, A, T What do you play now?

Sitting South, nil all & MPs you hold [hv=d=n&v=n&s=st75hat3djt4cqt87]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] 1♠ - (2♥) - 2♠ - (pass) pass - (3♥) - dbl - all pass Your double showed willingness to compete with some defense. What do you lead?

Question is from EBU-land, but I'm guessing/hoping the answer is true for everywhere... Suppose we have the following auction 2NT - pass - pass - 1♠ If dealer wishes to accept 1♠, say to attempt to play NT a level lower, (1) is it UI or AI to her partner that she has shown a big-balanced hand? (2) can the pair use their standard methods after a 1NT overcall, adjusting for the change of strength? (3) is it legal to have the agreement that an acceptance of 1♠ and a pass from dealer is forcing?