pbleighton

"Adam simple exercised his right of free speech; surely it was not his intent to inadvertantly contribute to what is now another example of a hate-filled cynicism(that's EXACTLY what it is too)." No. You are analyzing apples and applying the result to oranges. "This is an open forum and you are allowed to post in any thread you'd like to. If you post controversial articles, be prepared to get some flak. Expecting that putting a note under each article will stop people from replying is very naive. If a thread gets "sabotaged" (in my eyes a much too dramatic term for what actually happened), please stop whining about that. Maybe start disliking the person who did it but don't make a fuss about it here." Well put. Adam's opinion about matchpoints doesn't even come close to "sabotage" (FWIW, I am glad that both forms of scoring exist, and am agnostic about which is "better"). Peter

"If one presumes that 3♣ by parnter showed EXTRA values, then I think you have to bid to a slam in clubs. If 3♣ was just support noise, at matchpoints, you have to bid 3NT." Ben, I see that you failed to answer the same question as I did. Without agreements, other than literal SAYC, how would you bid to a slam, given the auction to 3S? I have to confess that I would just bid 6C. Better idea? Peter

It depends on whether 3C is strict SAYC - if it is it promises extra values, as the responder has promised a rebid. If so, I think you should make some kind of slam try - though this auction as it has developed is not suited for it, unless you have specific agreements. If 3C is NF, tending to be minimum, bid 3NT. Peter

"There are more worthwhile things to be disgusted about than the fact that you don't agree with Bob, or that you don't like that he has a thread for his students. Like poverty hunger disasters oppression crime misery suffering and bad movies." ROFL. Peter

" that too was "sabotaged" and resulted in no one benefitting from his knowledge" A very loose definition of "sabotage", IMO. In addition to that, the tone bobh took was unfortunate, to put it mildly. Peter

"Hostile. Deborah" Wrong. Disgusted. Peter

Isn't 2S 4sf? 3S for me - pd forced me to bid, so I bid. Peter

"It's sad to see this thread is also being sabotaged. It is being used for lesson notes and posted in an open forum, easy for BBO’ers to find, the information is available to anyone - take what you like and leave the rest. I had hoped common sense would prevail and anyone wanting to debate the content would have done so by starting a new thread or better still by running some lessons themselves, let the students decide which approach works best for them." Snippy. Peter

"POST NO REPLIES, PLEASE....THIS IS NOT THE PLACE....." Yes it is. These are the Bridge Base Forums. It's also hypocritical of you to attempt to rebut, then to try to prohibit others from rebuttal. If you just want to post your opinions without getting input, get yourself a web page. Peter

"I appreciate all the suggestions and I like many of your ideas. I have also been reading Mr. Gitelman's improving 2/1 articles and think having a forcing balanced raise could be useful. Right now we use bergen raises, jacoby, 2nt, 1M-3OM as a mini-splinter, 1M-3NT as 13-15 bal with 3 cd support, 1M 4C as 16+ bal 3 cd support, and 1M 4D as a 5 card support sub limit raise 8-11 or so. Unfortunately, this does not give us a true balanced forcing raise. We have considered using 1H-2S for this meaning but we still need something over 1S. I know its possible to give up one step of the Bergen raise to make room, but I'd rather not. Any suggestions?" Finish reading Fred's articles. You can play 1M-2NT as a balanced raise. You use all three jump shifts as 4 card raises. The lowest jump shift (1S-3C, 1H-2S) is Jacoby, and the other two are the invitational and constructive raises. This has always struck me as better than Bergen (I don't like Bergen, though - I play WJS when I play 2/1). Peter

"Transfer to diamonds and then 3♥ will show this type of hand. " Wouldn't that show 5-4, not 6-4? It's probably the best approach here, anyway. The problem with this hand IMO is the sixth club. Very few (if any) players have a mechanism to deal with this. If you were stronger (say AKQxxx in diamonds), you could bid 4D after 2S, and hope pd understands. Peter

According to their last BB cc, Meckwell play 1M-2NT as limit plus trump raise, usually with at least 4 cards. Greco-Hampson, who play a similar system, play it as GF with 4 card support. Peter

I rebid 1S, which is forcing in my partnerships. No need to bid 2S. This smells like a hand where no one can make 3 of anything. Peter

"If double was takeout, it seems normal to bid 5♠. But is double takeout? I think standard is that it's just "values" and should only be removed with shape. If partner has a doubleton diamond, five spades is quite likely to be a disaster. In any case, suits are not breaking well on this hand, and there's no reason partner has to have four spades. I'll pass and take the plus score." Agree. Peter

"Great topic....ok what is this hand worth and what is our rebid from last night? KQ874.....Q62....A64.....Q6 1H=1S 2C=? You may assume pard would open and rebid all 11 hcp hands in this auction." The hand is worth 4 hearts. Peter

"Really Bad: War of the Worlds" Gerben, you understate. It is simply the worst science fiction movie ever made (and possibly the most expensive). Good recent movies: The Constant Gardener Good Night, And Good Luck Peter

"Partner trusted you when he made a takeout double of 4♠ and you let him down by passing." Ben, do you think that viewing this double as takeout is standard bidding, or is it your agreements? I ask because I remember that you play takeout doubles through a much higher level than usual in North America. Peter

I would trust partner, and pass (i'm assuming his double of 4S was penalty). If pd made an unsound double at IMPs, let this be a lesson for him :lol: Peter

"How could 4N be RKC? there is no fit agreed. And opener might be in misfit with 3 spades and 2 diamonds." IMO responder has shown 6-4 and by bypassing 3NT insisted that the contract be played in a suit - there will always be at least a 6-2 diamond fit. Keycard is in spades, as the last suit bid. Peter

"I disagree: 4N would be to play." Well, you could have told us that :) In that case I agree with 5S - mild slam try. Peter

"I don't understand this. Why should partner have a slam try? How else could he bid a 5=0=6=2 game force?" Because: "However, the auction chosen by N indicates a clear disparity between the suit." I read that as 6D4S. With 6-5, wouldn't responder bid 2H, then rebid clubs twice? Peter

Agree with whereeagles, pd has a big distributional hand. It's your fault if you stop and slam is there, it's pd's fault if slam goes down. Clearly, go to slam :) I would bid 4NT, keycard in spades. This may not be good, pd may easily have a void, but I don't think anything else agrees spades. Peter

"Still, 4 card suits come up a lot more than 6 card ones" Try 5 card suits :) Peter

"There's often a thin line between a tactical psych and an illegal agreement." I believe that the applicable line is frequency. Peter

There is only one SAYC, and very few people who say they play it actually play it. Those who say "full" mean that they play the whole thing. "Basic" means 5 card majors, 2/1 responses forcing for one round, and 15-17 NT, maybe major suit transfers over NT, and that's about it. If someone just says "SAYC", it's probably basic :rolleyes: Peter