akhare

Why is this a fix? Seems like I can P now and be happy to defend if pard chooses to pass it out. The more interesting question is what to do if pard backs in with a X...

Too bad that you didn't having a meaning for 4♦ after (1♠)-X in this auction. IMO, it makes sense to play it as a FSJ -- showing concentration of values, support for partner's implied suit and more importantly, inviting partner to bid on with the right hand should they compete with 4♠...

IMO, things were pretty OK through 4♠. Was 4♠ clearly an cue agreeing ♥ in these methods or was it a general force? If so, the 5♣ may just be an attempt to show a second suit. 5♠ seems like a pure "torture pard bid" and 6N is either plain bonkers or paying pard back in kind :)..

5♣ for me -- the lack of controls makes me squeamish about the tempting 3♥. Unless LHO withheld significant ♥ support, it seems like pard has 4+♥ and will need a few ♥ ruffs in dummy...

X is tempting, but I am afraid that the bidding will be at 3♠ or higher, by the time it comes around to me. It seems right to get at least one suit on the table first, so 2♥, planning to X if the opps bid some number of ♠...

Add me to the list of people who misread the auction and assumed that they were leading into the hand that rebid 2N. In any case, I will go with awm's reasoning about declarer being a relatively balanced hand too and stick with my original ♣ or ♥. So, how did it the various leads pan out on the hand in question?

Attacking leads work well against small slams, but in this case, it seems good to go passive. I would opt for ♣ or ♥, with the latter having a little more weight...

On the related note, has anyone given a thought to playing 11-14 NV in the third seat *when* playing 10-12 NV in the first two seats? The idea of course is playing a 10-12 in the third seat makes it too easy for the opps and playing a light opening style, there's virtually no chance of game...

I would open 1♣ with this hand, but having made that choice, I am hoping to go plus by passing 5♦. Pard would have made some noise with interest in a ♦ slam if 3♦ can have up to 17 HCPs...

Late to the party here, but P seems pretty clear cut. A direct 3N may work out *if* that's our final resting place, but what's keeping pard from taking the bid too seriously?

Sin City is absolutely kick ass -- definitely one of the best graphic novel adaptations ever. The PQ on the BluRay version is jaw dropping!!!

Not to worry -- I loved Kill Bill too :P. However, I do put a stop to "just being entertained by the movie" when it comes to the dredges like 2012, Independence Day and most of the thrash churned out by Hollywood...

At a friend's place with a few others, in the proud majority of one (as bridge players go :))...

Wow -- I went through a similar procedure, but luckily my laptop escaped with just a swab :). The thoroughness is very impressive, especially if flying El Al -- multiple rounds of questioning (including cross questioning), full body frisking, manual examination of every carry on item. Of course, scalability is a another question...

The BluRay transfer of "Inglorious..." is outstanding -- now, if only they would release Pulp Fiction out here in BR as well (drool)...

I have seen both and Avatar was much superior and somehow managed not to be cloyingly mawkish...

Agree -- the 2012 script was simply awful. One would think that ~6 billion dead would put a dampener on things, but no, it was all 100 watt smiles, small talk and business as usual. Asking for suspension of disbelief is one thing, using it as an excuse for lazy script writing is another...

Pass 4♠ and hope to go + with a ♥ ruff or two...

Having made my bed with the support X (strongly prefer 2♥), I don't see much of a choice but to lie in it by passing 5♣-X...

Seems like this might do much better in the context of a strong 1♣ opening (UltraClub is a good example)...

The F-N system certainly looks like an adaptation of EHAA (albeit with tighter 2 level opening requirements). You can try tweaking their opening range to see if that works better for the 2 level bids...

Agree with the comments about the system so far. It certainly looks like something I would consider playing. It won't surprise Midchart committee deems that playing 1♠ as *promising* a 4+ card side suit isn't legal or demands an impossible defence, but I will stop at that lest I derail the thread.

It certainly wasn't the Coen brother's best and definitely a little light weight. It did tickle me though -- have you seen any other films by them?

Saw Avatar in 3D last night and found it mighty entertaining. Sure, it's stuffed with cliches about the the military / greedy corporate nexus, pagan / Hippiesque religious beliefs, but it's eye popping all right...

Seems like an easy enough 3♦ to me...