GreenMan

I would think that given the auction and play so far (RHO has ♣KQJx(x) and ♦xxx, leaving LHO only 2 or 3 minor-suit cards), spades 1-5 is impossible. So the only cases where it matters are stiff 9 and stiff Q in RHO. Seems like a tossup to me.

Seems as if the main takeaway from this thread is to have clear agreements on whether 2♠ shows extras after a 2/1 and to talk about contexts for showing controls. It matters less what you agree on than that you talk about it at all; knowing what partner has, and knowing partner can tell what you have, makes everything easier. If you find yourself in this situation without clear agreements, augahombre's analysis is probably best. You showed your hand and partner wasn't impressed, so better not to force things.

Seems as if the main takeaway from this thread is to have clear agreements on whether 2♠ shows extras after a 2/1 and to talk about contexts for showing controls. It matters less what you agree on than that you talk about it at all; knowing what partner has, and knowing partner can tell what you have, makes everything easier. If you find yourself in this situation without clear agreements, augahombre's analysis is probably best. You showed your hand and partner wasn't impressed, so better not to force things.

Frances makes some good points. I would like to suggest that "best team possible" not be a priority. "Good team" ought to be, of course, but at some point you're splitting hairs or making subjective judgments. If the whole team is Adv+ or better then that ought to be enough. If I were running things (good thing I'm not, for various reasons :rolleyes: ) I'd make established BBF partnerships first priority, then some combination of good players + first volunteers. There ought to be some value in stepping up early. Oh, and, since putting a team together is a mostly thankless volunteer task, I'd be OK with a first principle that "The organizer's decisions are arbitrary, capricious, and final." :P

I've known a couple of men who, when their wife/partners were declaring, would announce after each trick, "In the dummy" or "In your hand." They generally only get to do it once or twice before I remind them it's illegal.

I assume that's the royal "you" and not directed at me specifically since I hadn't weighed in on that particular question before then. :) As it happens that's my preference too, but I'm mostly a bystander here so my opinion shouldn't matter so much. :) EDIT: Didn't see gszes' last post till now. Agree with everything in it.

I dunno, 14.6 or so.

If overcaller overtakes the first heart and clears the suit, then our side will have to run 8 tricks without playing to overcaller's side ace. Not a sure thing, is all I'm saying (opening leader could still have Jxxx somewhere).

If anyone says this to me, I'll slug them. :P

The club directors page has links to a PDF of Duplicate Decisions and to Baron Barclay to buy a hard copy.

jallerton can speak for theirself but it seemed to me that the offer was simply to fill out the team with a regular partnership of two BBF posters, rather than one poster + one not OR two posters who hadn't played together, and assuming that Phil and Cameron were already committed to. IMHO the forums give the best account of themselves with regular partnerships, but the pickup approach appears to work fine too, so whatevs. :) I'm just glad we have these matches at all. :)

It seems to me that if that's the case, then our ♥K is unprotected, so either we need RHO to have no hearts, or we need running tricks for game in the two suits we control, or we have to find the 5m that's making. Against that parley, +100 doesn't look too bad; we can win the match on another board. Or am I missing something obvious (as I often do)? (edited to fix analysis goof)

I repeat someone's earlier observation that Florida itself has both an east coast and a west coast, though the latter is more often called the Gulf coast. One may also note that part of Alaska is in the Eastern hemisphere, so it may be said* that it has an east coast in that section. *Just try and stop me!

Meckstroth and Levin, like many of their peers, play matchpoints infrequently, so the evidence for their superiority at that form of scoring is conjectural.

For us to believe that you weren't being snidely superior, we'd have to believe that you were saying that there are no bidding boxes in the U.K. Is that, in fact, what you were saying?

I was sitting back because I was in a match recently, but since we seem to be running short, I'll check at the club tonight with an up-and-coming junior I've played with a number of times. I'll report back ASAP. EDIT: It turns out I have a previous engagement that had slipped my mind. Sorry. Next time!

Exactly my experience. Our teammates at the national Swiss went from "Isn't that just for real good players?" to "Hey, this is fun!" in just the first few boards.

There's really only one way to find out: Go out there and play with the big boys, or at least the medium-size boys. It sounds as if you're looking for experience and good competition more than a social outing, which means you'll probably find the tougher games more to your liking than the other 199ers you've talked to. And us slightly more experienced players are always glad to see newer players taking the plunge, partly because the more the merrier, and partly because we think we'll get a couple of good boards off you. :) Naturally this doesn't always happen. :) If you're bidding most of the games you should be bidding and taking most of the tricks you should be taking, you won't be embarrassed. Everyone in the open room knows what it's like to finish last, so it's no big deal if it takes you a while to get your feet under you. But it sounds as if you'll do fine.

Years ago my regular partner and I installed the 10-12 1NT. The first tournament event we played in, it came up a number of times and we finished first. Then it rarely came up again and we had so-so results thenceforth.

Good hand for ... Rollover Gerber! 2♣ - 2♦ 2NT - 3NT 4♣ - 4♦ (0 aces) 4♥ - 4♠ (0 kings) 5♣ (queens?) :rolleyes: Seriously, I'd probably just blast 6NT unless partner would raise on Jxx Jxx xxxx xxx.

It's cheaper if you insist on Kem cards, which is not a bad thing to do. I have a few decks and love them.

If you were using fractions, as you were suggesting earlier, the last would be "interest is 3/25 of principal" which requires more calculations (one each for the numerator and denominator) than starting with decimal numbers. And if the interest rate had more significant figures you could end up with fractions with 5 or more digits in either field. I don't think "fear of fractions" explains any reluctance to work with them on that scale.

Percentages were invented (perhaps as far back as Ancient Rome, per Wikipedia) because they're easier to work with than fractions, especially for businesses, which have an economic interest in efficiency. They became standard in textbooks starting in the Middle Ages.

"times fewer" is an idiomatic expression that has taken root and is widely recognized, so whatever "logic" you can bring to bear against it will just bounce off like a tennis ball off a brick wall. It's certainly more elegant than "one-three-hundred-seventieth as much". :P

I believe their underbidding is explained by RHO adding distributional points for shortness and LHO adding points for length.