glen

3♦: to play in diamonds or a game try in clubs on the first hand, if opener's second suit is ♦s, that often ends in a 5-2 fit at the three level, when 3NT (opener maximum) or 2♠ (opener not maximum) would be better contracts.

The G canape link I had in there is now: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:aSxFn27lnlQJ:bridgefiles.net/pdf/g-canape2.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca

what is a common type of hand that responder will have? That will be about average points, no good fit in opener's major. Say responder has: ♠ 76 ♥ AQ982 ♦ 82 ♣ AJ75 what does responder do opposite the 8-15. If responder bids, he may already be too high. If responder passes, opener might be 14-15, and/or might have ♣s. Say responder has: ♠ 6 ♥ AQ982 ♦ 82 ♣ AJ875 Now what does responder do? You can discover these types of issues, for this and other methods you have recently suggested here, by using bridge software that produces hands to your specifications, and then bidding them. Best wishes.

Here is a structure: http://www.bridgematters.com/idea3.htm Two keys: 1) to get the forcing notrump type in, the cheapest response is either a transfer or a balanced hand (quasi-balanced, such as a 4-4-4-1 with singleton in opener's major) 2) opener's rebids are transfers The pure transfer over the natural major opening does not work, as well described above

Q. If you are playing 1C on 3-3, 1D on 4-4, can you still play better minor?

Matchpoint Precision (book by C. C. Wei, Ron Andersen) see: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/44231-match-point-precision-1nt-bid-no-4-card-majors/

weak or mini, see: madala-bocchi.pdf

Thank you. There are so many people whose generosity and support is the reason that I'm sitting here right now. The creative team Cameron Mackintosh, Tom Hooper; from Working Title: Eric Fellner, Tim Bevan, Debra Hayward; and from Universal: Ron Meyer, Donna Langley and Adam Fogelson. Thank you, guys, for your faith and thank you for this opportunity. I have to thank my team, led by the lionhearted Suzan Bymel. Josh Lieberman, Mick Sullivan, Maha Dakhil… Please say I just said everyone. Josh Lieberman again, just to be safe. Stephen Huvane, Jason Sloane and special contributions by Frank Selvaggi and Kerry Wagner. I want to thank my friends, especially the ones who are cheering from Crosby Street tonight. My family, who I'm so blessed to be a part of. My spouse. By far and away, the greatest moment of my life is the one when you walked into it. I love you so much. And thank you for this. Here's hoping that someday in the not too distant future I will play this well again. Thank you.

let me fix that: 1) ♠ QJ2 ♥ 32 ♦ AK32 ♣ 5432 ♠ AK543 ♥ KQ4 ♦ Q54 ♣ J6 2) ♠ QJ2 ♥ 32 ♦ KJ32 ♣ QJ92 ♠ AK543 ♥ KQJ ♦ Q54 ♣ T5 Same shapes, but the 4M/3NT is quite distinct.

A couple of example layouts to illustrate: 1) ♠ Q32 ♥ 32 ♦ AK32 ♣ 5432 ♠ AKJ54 ♥ KQ4 ♦ Q54 ♣ J6 2) ♠ Q32 ♥ 32 ♦ KJ32 ♣ QJ92 ♠ AKJ54 ♥ KQJ ♦ Q54 ♣ T5 Same shapes, but the 4M/3NT is quite distinct.

the muppet monsters

It is the most important, but is actually: 1. It's important to find some of our 5-3 major suit fits. The some includes some where both hands are balanced/semi-balanced. The actual set of hands (where the 5-3 fit is better) is quite complex, and discussion is likely best for another thread.

Slavinsky is quite different than 3/5. Stay with what your group plays, if they switch from "Moscow style" to 3/5, you should too. Best imo is something like: http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files/WBC2013/BermudaBowl/Italy/madala-bocchi.pdf 3/5 suit, attitude NT

play! --- this one bit relates to the 10,000 hours: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/sportingscene/2013/08/psychology-ten-thousand-hour-rule-complexity.html

Yes, it is okay to bid 1NT in an attempt to improve the contract. On the first hand if you pass opener's 2♣ rebid you could be cold for 4♥

Their cc: madala-bocchi.pdf "System On", and not clear what that is

For those six world championship hands, here are the complete results available: Board 1 Unfav vul, 1♥-1♠ overcall with ♠KQJ65 ♥74 ♦J76 ♣T85 Nunes board 18, 4th final session world championship Open: Bathurst: 1♥-1♠ Buras, Madala: 1♥-Pass TNOT: Huang, Seamon: 1♥-1♠ Jansma, Yang: 1♥-Pass Seniors: Bates, Romanski, VanHoutte, Wenning: 1♥-Pass VC: Michielsen: 1♥-1♠ Liu, Meyers, Smith: 1♥-Pass Board 2 All white, 1♦-2♣ overcall with ♠6 ♥Q93 ♦Q2 ♣KJT8654 Fantoni board 24, 4th final session world championship Open: Bocchi, Narkiewicz: 1♦-3♣ Dwyer: Pass-4♣ TNOT: Dai, Pszczola: 1♦-3♣ Paulissen: 1NT-3♣ Chen: 1♣-3♣ Seniors: Grenthe: 1♦-2♣ Hayden: 1♦-3♣ Kowalski: 1♦-Pass Marsal: 1NT-3♣ VC: Yan: 1♦-3♣ Wortel: 1NT-3♣ Brock: 1♦-Pass Zur-Campanile: Pass-Pass Board 3 Fav vul, 1♣-1♦ overcall with ♠874 ♥72 ♦AQ98743 ♣5 Bocchi board 19, 2nd quarterfinal session world championship 1♣ was artificial, strong Open: Kranyak, Wang: 1♠-4♦ Robson: 1♠-1NT (comic) Zimmermann: 1♠-3♦ Smith: 1♣-4♦ Seniors: Coyle, Grenthe: 1♣-3♦ Hayden, Janssens: 1♠-4♦ VC: Audt, Wortel: 1♠-3♦ Board 4 Both vul, 1♠-2♥ overcall with ♠K73 ♥KQ753 ♦AT85 ♣2 Lauria board 13, 1st semifinal session world championship Open: Balicki, Fantoni, Wolpert: 1♠-2♥ Seniors: Leenhardt, Wold: 1♠-2♥ Kratz: 1♠-Pass Klukowski: 1NT-Pass VC: Brown, Wortel: 1♠-Pass Board 5 Unfav vul, 1♣-1♠ overcall with ♠KJT864 ♥T954 ♦3 ♣KJ Duboin board 19, 2nd semifinal session world championship Open: Helgemo: 1♦-1♠ Zmudzinski: 1NT-2♦ (one major) Kranyak: 1NT-2♥ (♠s) Seniors: Lasocki: 1♦-1♠ Passell, Wenning: Pass-2♠ Grenthe: 1NT-2♥ (♠s) VC: Eythorsdottir: 1♣-1♠ Dhondy: 1♦-2♠ Liu: Pass-2♠ Van Zwol: Pass-2♦ (Multi) Board 6 All white, 1♣-1♥ overcall with ♠T74 ♥AT7532 ♦96 ♣74 Sementa board 8, 3rd semifinal session world championship Open: Levin, Fantoni: 1♣-Pass Narkiewicz: 1♣-2♥ Seniors: Hayden, Elinescu: 1♣-Pass Lasocki: 1♦-2♥ Poizat: 1♠-Pass VC: Zhang, Pasman, Eythorsdottir: 1♣-Pass F. Brown: 1♦-Pass

Sincerely, thank you!

There is a clear difference between "Decent players have done X" and "Decent players would have done X" and to do otherwise makes one or their partner related to Caspar Milquetoast. The latter does not result in a fallacious conclusion, as any course of logic would teach. Suggesting that Fantoni and Levin are conservative is totally silly. Suggesting that when 1 person out of 12 is the only person to take a specific action is not at least worth some study is totally silly.

Yes, but I think this is key, and well worth reposting in whole: I believe that the Italian style is to make non-jump overcalls on a wide range of hands, and this then frees up jump overcalls for specific meanings, whether well-defined weak, well-defined intermediate, two-suiter. In other words, imo, they don't overcall 2♣ because 3♣ is not available, they overcall 2♣ because that is their style which frees up the 3♣ bid for other meanings. In answer to OP's question, by studying the Italian style where overcalls may have little in defensive value, you can see when and how they X the opponents. Note the Italian style has another component, that is they will double on some strong hands that the Kokish school would still overcall on. If you look at the ACBL cc's on the USBF site, common one level overcall ranges are 7-17, 8-18, 6-18, 6-17, 7-18 for a simple overcall, but the Italians drop both the bottom and the top of these.

Let's start with board 6. Open: Levin, Fantoni: 1♣-Pass Narkiewicz: 1♣-2♥ Seniors: Hayden, Elinescu: 1♣-Pass Lasocki: 1♦-2♥ Poizat: 1♠-Pass VC: Zhang, Pasman, Eythorsdot: 1♣-Pass F. Brown: 1♦-Pass It would be best if you re-rephrase at this point before we continue

Thus the players holding these hands in the world championships who took other actions are not decent players in your view?

Does your partner bid like this: Unfav vul, 1♥-1♠ overcall with ♠KQJ65 ♥74 ♦J76 ♣T85 All white, 1♦-2♣ overcall with ♠6 ♥Q93 ♦Q2 ♣KJT8654 Fav vul, 1♣-1♦ overcall with ♠874 ♥72 ♦AQ98743 ♣5 Both vul, 1♠-2♥ overcall with ♠K73 ♥KQ753 ♦AT85 ♣2 Unfav vul, 1♣-1♠ overcall with ♠KJT864 ♥T954 ♦3 ♣KJ All white, 1♣-1♥ overcall with ♠T74 ♥AT7532 ♦96 ♣74 Then you need to bid like a world class Italian advancer Above boards: Nunes board 18, 4th final session world championship Fantoni board 24, 4th final session world championship Bocchi board 19, 2nd quarterfinal session world championship Lauria board 13, 1st semifinal session world championship Duboin board 19, 2nd semifinal session world championship Sementa board 8, 3rd semifinal session world championship

you should tend to x less on auctions where the opponents are showing power

how do you vote that partner should call the TD?