pbleighton

4D. I'd like to have better spades to go this high, but I have to show my shape, and as Ron says, partner doesn't need much. I don't like double, this is definitely a *show* hand rather than an *ask* hand. Peter

"Winston are you saying any country does not have the right to develop Nukes? Which do or do not have these rights and how do the noncountries get these rights?" Personally, I think that either: 1. No country has the right to develop nuclear weapons, or 2. Every country has the right to develop nuclear weapons I prefer 1, but unfortunately it isn't applicable to our universe. I'm left with 2. Peter

"Contextually, this seems to show diamonds and a major. Otherwise, why bid at this level and not open 1♦ or 2♦ initially?" Would you really do this with a partner if you hadn't discussed it previously? I wouldn't. Peter

First hand: I agree with 4H. Double is horrible. 4H is a preemptive bid which doesn't promise any defense. Without the redouble, I would leave the double in, but as is, I would run to 5H. Second hand: the 4S bidder is too strong for the bid. Vul at IMPs, I would: 1. If I was playing a constructive 2S (8-10 or so, which I hate, but which works here), I would bid it, and we would play 4S. 2. If not, I think I would bid 3S (and I hope I'm not saying this because it's the Forum), and we would bid the slam. It's close though. I don't worry about missing 27 point slams, they're nice, but they go down a lot, and you have to be a very strong pair to bid them accurately. You don't have to be nearly as strong to think that you do :) Peter

" only wish there was a heavy, heavy obligation...but where in Iraq in 2002 and in Afganistan in 2007? I did not see it." The obligation existed, but it was ignored. Most of the mainstream media seemed to think that their job was to pimp for the war. Peter

"Can we agree that to say we should NOT be in ANY civil wars but we should be in SOME civil wars is nonsense?" If your first statement is absolute, yes. However, you're creating a straw man. If, as many (including myself) would say, it is in general a very bad idea to be in another country's civil war, but there are occasional exceptions, no it is not nonsense, it is common sense. Another way of putting it is that there is a very heavy burden of proof on those who would advocate getting involved (or starting) another country's civil war. A very heavy burden, but it is not impossible to meet. For example, let's say that instead of Saddam and Bin Laden being enemies, they were very close allies, and Al Qaeda was based in Iraq, and got most of its funding and members from Iraq. Saddam was aware of and helped with 9/11. The Sunni population mostly backed Al Qaeda enthusiastically. In other words, a substantially greater involvement than the Taliban had. The Sunni/Shia/Kurd hostilities were the same as they are now, but the Sunnis were the large majority, and would obviously win any civil war. Furhter, when we (justifiably) invaded, civil war broke out. Under those circumstances, we would have to stay. Capice? :) Peter

"Does a 4C/D opener specifically show an 8-trick hand, or is there some wiggle room?" This depends how you play it, but when I played it, it showed 8-8.5, not 9. Peter

"Do you guys even know why a lot of the world hates the US?" I've got an idea :blink: "Peter I cannot even convince you Korea is at war and has been in a state of war for 50 years despite your own links." Which demonstrated that the Korean civil war is generally considered to have ended in 1953, despite the lack of a technical peace document. "I am not a genius at the internet," Yeah, typing in Google.com requires 160+ IQ ;) "if you cannot find proof I doubt I can but it is true. Yes, he advocated for sending USA troops in the middle of the Rawanda Civil war and the current civil war in Darfur." Here's the first thing I found whjen I googled Obama Darfur: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5122600547.html This is a December 2005 Washington Post op-ed by Obama and Senator Sam Brownback (a conservative Republican), denouncing the genocide in Darfur, and then laying out a four point plan: "First, the administration must help transform the African Union protection force into a sizable, effective multinational force. In the near term, Washington must pressure Khartoum to allow more advisers from Western nations to embed within the African Union's mission so they support intelligence, logistics and communications. It must work with other nations to provide military assets to African Union forces, such as attack helicopters and armored personnel carriers, so they can respond immediately to attacks. And it must urge the African Union to be more aggressive in protecting civilians. More important, Washington must immediately spearhead efforts to create a larger multinational force. The African Union has begun discussions with the United Nations about folding itself into a follow-on U.N. mission, but because of the West's reluctance to offend African sensibilities, all parties seem resigned to muddling along. It has become clear that a U.N.- or NATO-led force is required, and the administration must use diplomacy to override Chinese and Sudanese opposition to such a force and persuade outside troops to join it. Second, the administration must keep up the pressure on the rebels to unite their negotiating positions, and it must enlist Sudan's allies to increase the pressure on Khartoum to share power and resources. Third, the United States and other nations must place additional pressure on key nations -- Chad, Eritrea and Libya -- to stop playing a destructive role in the conflict. Fourth, the administration needs to place its weight behind the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, which would impose targeted sanctions on the leading perpetrators of the genocide." No invasion of Sudan here, just diplomacy and beefing up the existing peacekeeping forces. Peter

"Do you take another call?" Certainly not. You asked a question, and partner said no. Bidding 6S is bad for the partnership. If you had wanted to bid slam unilaterally (a reasonable choice, though I agree with 5H), you should have just bid slam. "Why didn't I open 4♠" Because the hand is too strong for an NV 4S. Vulnerable, I think 4S would be a reasonable alternative. Peter

I agree with you, 2H would have been enough. Add the heart queen and you have a 3H bid. Peter

"See Obama......for one Rawanda, Darfur, yes." When and where has he advocated the U.S. invading Sudan? Links please. Peter

"I would pass first round. 7 hcp and void in partners suit. I dont want to encourage partner and no need to rescue yet." No way I pass the first time. Scared bridge is losing bridge, IMO. Pass the second time around is clear. Peter

Caution: fairly long post about a system that won't get you to the Bermuda Bowl :) Fun Fun Fun (think Beach Boys) is a primarily natural, very aggressive, major oriented system. 1H and 1S are 8-11 hcp, 4+ cards, and may have a much longer minor. We open about 65% of hands in the first seat. It's playable and lots of fun. Opening Bids 1C/1D 11+ unbalanced, 15+ balanced, unlimited, 4+ cards, except may be 3 if balanced 1H/1S 8-11, 4+ cards, may have a much longer minor 1NT 11-14, may be 5M422 2C 5+ hearts, 15+ 2D 5+ spades, 15+ 2H/2S 5+ cards, usually not 5332 or 5422, 11-14. 11 is an upgrade and will always have a decent 6 card suit, or a 7 card suit. We open with less than 11 exceptionally. 2NT 20-21 3C/3D preemptive, 6+ cards 3H/3S preemptive, 7+ cards (6+ in the third seat) 3NT 24+ Bidding After 1C/1D is standardish. Bidding After 1H/1S 1M-1NT 10-14, not forcing. A jump shift or reverse over this shows 10-11 and a 6-5 shape (6 in the bid suit). 1H-1S 6+ hcp, 4+ spades, forcing 1M-2M 0-14, 3+ cards. After 1M-2M, opener will almost always pass. With a 5-5 or better and a max, opener rebids 3 of the second suit. 1M-3M 0-10, 5+ cards 1M-2NT limit+ trump raise 2/1 responses are forcing for one round, and are 15(14)+. 1M-1NT-2m or 1H-1S-2m show 5+ in the minor. Bidding After 2C/2D (the primary cost of the system) Weak hands (less than decent 5) bid opener's real suit, or pass with 6+ in the bid suit and singleton or void in the real suit. The opener passes unless he has a huge hand, in which case he rebids naturally, which is forcing to game. Game force hands (10, decent 9) can bid 2NT to force a natural rebid, bid game directly, bid a new suit showing 5+ cards in a major, and 6+ cards in a minor(but not the next suit up - see below), or make a slam try. Invitational hands (decent 7-9) with 3 card support raise to 3. A raise to 3 in a contested aution is competitive. Invitational hands (decent 7-9) without 3 card support and all constructive hands (decent 5-7) bid the next suit up (2D after 2C, 2H after 2D). This is alertable. With 15-18 hcp, opener then rebids suit at the 2 level, regardless of shape. With 19 (good 18) +, he rebids shape above 2 of the suit. For example, 2C-2D-2S shows 5+ hearts and 4+ spades. The strong rebids are forcing to game. After a strong rebid, the responder just rebids naturally. After the weak rebid (2M): 1) With the constructive hand (decent 5-7), pass. 2) With the invitational hand and 2 card support, bid 3M (invitational). Opener will pass with a minimum, or bid 3NT with a 5 card suit, or 4M with a 6 card suit. 3) With the invitational hand and 0-1 card support, bid 2NT, or a new suit with a decent 6 card minor or 5 of the other major. Bidding After 2H/2S Raise to 3 - invitational (decent 9-11) with 2+ cards. Opener will pass with a minimum, or bid 3NT with a 5 card suit, or 4M with a 6 card suit. 2M-2NT forces to game. Opener rebids naturally. With a 6-4, he rebids the lower ranking suit. A new suit is forcing to game, and shows 5+ cards in a major, and 6+ cards in a minor. Peter

"I too would have raised to 4♣ after game try." Agree. AQxx in clubs just got huge. This hand is tough, though. Missing slam is no shame. As South, I might have bid 4S rather than 3C opposite a limited opening. A 4S response to 3C could be done an a max rather than with club support, and you still have a small doubleton in hearts to contend with. Peter

"So many candidates just say we should be or been in Rawanda or Darfur but not in a Civil war in Iraq where we are targets and make numerous mistakes. This argument of course makes no sense as presented yet so many Democrats seem to be running on it." Question: which Democratic candidate(s) for President has advocated the invasion of Sudan? Answer: none of them have. Mike, sometimes you make stuff up. Peter

"lightish opening, I open one spade...no problem yet." Unless of course you are having one of those days where you routinely pass 13 counts :) In my 2/1 partnership I open 2S, and my partner tanks, then bids 4S. In my other partnership I open 1S (8-11), my partner responds 2S (0-14), and there it rests, unless we are pushed higher. Peter

Pass. For the doublers, what do you do over 3H by partner, which I'm guessing will happen about 50% of the time? Peter

Pass. I would bid 5S at favorable. Peter

Assuming 3H agreed diamonds, then 4D was wrong. Why ask partner a question if you won't accept the answer? Peter

"We are sure a straight man would not have A or K of diamonds" Really? At the 4 level? No science, I don't have a method to find out what I need, I'm bidding 6H. Peter

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7022001268.html Interesting comment on the U.S. position in the Middle East from a prominent, strong supporter of the Iraq invasion. Peter

"ok but passing this hand seems ok to me in first or second seat but then I pass 13 hcp often." But then you open flat 11s often :) Peter

I agree with Ben. I bid 3S. Peter

4S, which I hope pd will interpret as a splinter. Peter

Pass. Peter