GreenMan

That's bizarre. You've only had one pair say that? :rolleyes:

Transfer then 3NT, though a direct 3NT is close. I'm not bright enough to tell whether 3NT or 4♠ is better at matchpoints on this deal, so I'm soliciting partner's opinion. You're probably getting conflicting advice because those two options are close to equal in quality IMHO, and some will have strong opinions one way or the other. (Insisting on 4♠ is too unilateral.) A spade contract will be best if the opponents have a suit they can run, but OTOH that spade suit will likely produce the same number of tricks in either contract, so 3NT may well score better; and bidding it directly will give the opps less information for their opening lead and subsequent defense. Pick your poison.

Yeah, the last word that comes to mind when you say ACBL is "nimble".

I spent about 2.5 hours on a train two seats ahead of a 5ish-year-old who was screaming the whole way. Some of it was childish exuberance, which I actually appreciate in small doses, but every time her mother or guardian would try to get her to settle down, she'd fly into a shrieking rage. For hours. That's not normal kid stuff; other children in the car were observing social norms about noise in public just fine.

I'd be surprised if the ACBL isn't trying to remedy this incompatibility; I doubt they like the delays and extra work of manually entering scores any more than the players do.

I usually include the word "contract" and, since I'm in the U.S., "acbl". Those or, say, "wbf" can usually filter out the infrastructure.

Hmm, surprised to see so many votes for 1♦ then 2♥, since players in ACBL-land overwhelmingly treat this as 4♥ 5♦ (if they understand about reverses at all), as the OP seems to have done. After partner skips over both majors to bid 1NT I'd raise to 3 without a second thought. I slightly prefer 1♦ to open, but if my partner opted for 2NT I wouldn't second-guess him.

Interesting; thanks for the explanation.

I'm most persuaded by MrAce's suggestion that North has ♠xxx and thus believes South is void, especially after we take the push to 6. With no double, I lead a spade. With the double I haven't a clue.

But that doesn't explain why partner is signaling interest in a shift. He can only have 3-4 HCP besides the ♣QJ unless South is playing games, and if they were the ♠K, would he try to deflect us from continuing clubs? That makes me think partner has something like ♦KJTxx, and we ought to lead diamonds every time we're in. I'm sure I've overlooked a couple of things, so I look forward to the full analysis.

From the Wikipedia page on the topic: "Xeni Jardin, co-editor of Boing Boing, said of the practice, 'the dialogue stays, but the misanthrope looks ridiculous, and the emotional sting is neutralized.' Also, Boing Boing producers claim that disemvoweling sends a clear message to internet forums as to types of behavior that are unacceptable." There's a Web tool here. So if some mod decided my last post violated the TOS they could quickly run it through that tool and produce

That's exactly it. Teresa Nielsen-Hayden came up with it. You can see that someone broke the TOS, and who, and if you really want to know what they said you can figure it out, but most people won't bother, so the message they worked so hard to send gets snuffed without mercy. But it'd be tedious, especially with long posts, if the software won't automate it for the mods.

I rarely see it, it's sort of a tactical-nuclear option that only a few fora use. But I love the idea.

I suspect that line refers to pairs or teams not in contention facing those that are; this would apply to Swiss or BAM teams but not KOs, IMHO -- a "what the hey" tactic rather than the reasonable high-variance approach you describe. But I may be wrong.

Does the software allow for quick moderation of offending posts such as disemvowelling? That would streamline the process considerably in a number of ways.

Ah, I get it now. :)

See, on the Internet, sometimes we can tell you're a dog.

The root cause of you calling someone the village idiot is you. The "It's not my fault, I'm a victim!" defense, a.k.a. "But Mommy, he started it!", only works if you're under age 12.

Reminds me of Zia's story of a double missed opportunity in his first foray into top-level teams. He sacced in the wrong suit and went for an unnecessary 1400, but at the comparison the team captain just said "Push" and moved on. It took three days before he made bold to ask what happened at the other table; teammates were in 4Hx+3 for 1390.

Both approaches are fine. IMHO allowing either 5cM works a bit better, but I'm sure the difference is small.

I play a couple of variations with two different partners. You start with a 3♠ relay to 3NT, then follow-ups show one or both minors. In the simpler version, 3♠ --> 3NT is always GF. Then 4m is one-suited and strong, 4♥/♠ both minors longer ♣/♦ respectively, 4NT m/m equal length. You could also play 4M there as shortness with both minors and slam interest. The relay then 5♣ can be choice of games with no slam interest. Other variations and permutations exist. I'm not saying any of this is better than MSS. It's just what these partners have asked me to play, and I don't mind. YMMV.

But your way, *he* has to do the work. His way, *you* have to do the work. The preference is clear. :P

I wouldn't call it a squeeze: In a squeeze, you'd watch what LHO discards, and then pitch from the other suit in dummy. In this position, you pitch from the same suit that LHO pitches. So it's just an endplay, stepping-stoneish, with some care required in the preparation.

This has been my understanding. I don't know JEC and can only infer his motivations, but I think that except in big tournaments the game is more important to him than the result, so as long as we make a reasonable showing then it's all good. I don't think JEC has to "maximize fun", so to speak, in every match as long as he's enjoying the game in the long run. Again, that's just my impression.

In fourth seat I'll probably just open 4♥. In other seats I might open 1♥, planning to bid Diamonds thereafter, and figure things out as we go. I can see some logic in opening 1♦, reversing into Hearts, then bidding 4♥ as choice of games, but that seems to create as many problems as it solves.