Vilgan

I'd recommend the book "25 steps to learning 2/1" by Paul Thurston. Its very reader friendly, and does a good job introducing people to the basic 2/1 system. Amazon listing I'm not sure how rubber bridge friendly 2/1 is, but my rubber bridge knowledge is sketchy at best. Good luck!

I think S should just cash out (in their mind at least) at 4♥. This is frequently the right spot as he has no club stopper, and his/her partner must have a reason for bidding them 2x. With a doubleton club and partner ignoring notrump to rebid hearts, I don't know that 4♦ is a great bid. That has the nice side effect (in this instance) of simplifying the bidding significantly. Now N can bid keycard and bid whichever grand they feel is better. If south does choose to bid 4♦, I think they should take the push to 7 after partner bids 6. Its definitely one of those grands that will be missed at some tables. I don't see any fault with North's bidding, and while I think south could have done better... its very understandable single dummy.

I think there are more chances that they play partscore than that they stay away from slam. Come on, partner opened and you have double fit and 23 HCP!!!! Aye. The only way this doesn't end in slam is if opener passes a forcing bid. I had a similar situation where my partner and I were killing ourselves for stopping in 6NT when we should have pushed to 7♦... just to find out that the opener at the other table passed his partner's forcing 2♦ response. As for the actual choice, I'd have to go with 7NT. It seems like we'll always make 7NT if we get the diamonds right, and there are chances to make 7 without diamonds if we play in NT. If I do play in diamonds though and a diamond isn't led, I'll be very tempted to finesse the opening leader for the Q. I don't really get playing this in a small grand though. Long suits, sources of tricks, all kinds of power. If the opps know they are slightly outmatched, they will probably be even more likely to take the push to grand in an attempt to make up for losses elsewhere.

I'd be interested... Team game organization is pretty informal from what I've seen. While this is cool for those involved, it'd be nice to be able to get something regular going for those of us who aren't active enough on BBO to know lots of people. Please PM me if you start getting something going :)

I don't see any route to 11 tricks after the club continuation. Describe your plan?

2♠ bid was decent imo. Its not a great suit, but they did have 7 of the suckers. The main argument against it is the fact partner has not bid yet and you do have 3 hearts. Others might just over call with 8 points but I don't think it was a crazy choice. The following bids by that partnership make absolutely no sense though. 3♥ on a 5 bagger and an 8 count?!? huh?!? And pulling it BACK to spades doesn't make a lot of sense either. The 3♥ bidder should have 6+ hearts that don't suck, and that hand has 3 hearts and a stiff diamond in support. Soo... 2♠ is something some will do and some won't (imo). However, the followup bids defy logic.

I'm a bit confused as to why it matters. At decent levels, who forgets they play puppet? Its not like a rare bid or one that might be ambiguous. If a big could be a suit, or a special bid, or a cue bid... then an alert gives something away. But puppet is super easy and comes up enough that memory shouldn't be an issue. It just seems hard to imagine this actually being an issue in a place other than a club game... and UI is already crazy common there.

It'd sure be a lot easier if it was following a movie that poked bridge into popular culture a little bit. Virtually everyone under the age of 40 thinks of it as a nursing home game that blue haired ladies play while waiting to kick the bucket. Two routes.. Rounders style with lots of focus on the drama/money/competitiveness of it, or Searching for Bobby Fischer style. Lots of other things make it elsewhere... heck Starcraft is televised constantly in South Korea. But sparking that initial interest is probably going to be very hard in the US.

I played mini NT for a while and really enjoyed it. A few quick observations/confirmations of what people have already said: "equal or better" is bad, 15+ is a good guideline unless you have tricks/a lead If you have a suit/tricks/a good lead, X'ing is now a lot easier. Doable with 13/14 imo. Responder having X available for everything is really nice. I have gotten a lot of nice swings on auctions like: 1NT - 2S - X. Balancing back in is really good at MPs especially if the side that opened 1NT is not vulnerable. It might go for a number.. weak NT openers tend to mix things up. However, I have gotten sick amounts of MPs from 1NT p p p when RHO could have balanced and gotten a 110 or 140 instead of 50 or 100. It is more risky at imps.. but still frequently a good idea.

As much as I dislike the women's events and am amazed at some of the people who are "national champions", isn't it fairly accepted at this point that there are biological differences between men and women that makes bridge easier for men? The most observable difference is the female multitask vs the male single task. Men do not multitask well... hence why many of us get "you aren't listening to me!!" comments. Women can do multiple things at once AND listen and don't get why we can't (or that's my excuse for my girlfriend anyway). On the flipside, we are more able to focus and single task better than women. From what I understand, it goes back to the whole... men hunt, women protect the kids and be aware of all threats at once type thing. There are some other differences, like women tend to pick up and track things better peripherally which can be a distraction as well. One tournament there was a fight that involved the table next to us being thrown across the room that I was not even aware of... I still dislike restricted events giving a national title, but I don't think its an accident that there are so few all female partnerships that really do well together at the top levels. Cecilia/Sara and Sabine/Danielle are the only 2 partnerships that pop into my head as contenders at that level.

Our group of friends was considering it. While we only made a difference of like 50-60 tables, I imagine we were not unique in our decision making process. Reasons for not going to the fall NABC this year: 1) It was Boston 2) Economy 3) Dislike for fall schedule (the events themselves, not the fact it hit thanksgiving) The main reason we didn't go is the fact it was in Boston. Had it been in a more accessible or nice place there is a good chance we would have gone. Boston in late November? No thank you. Also: the prices in Boston are wretched. Dallas, Nashville, St. Louis, Vegas: all these places we found hotels for $30 to $50 a night. We had no such luck in Boston. It was looking like plane tickets would be $300 a person and hotels for $100 a night (although the hassle made the host hotels seem like a decent deal at $135). Heck, I went to the Hawaii NABC and only spent $950ish for hotel (nice one!) and air fare for the tournament. Paying more to go to Boston in a crappy/nasty time of year just did not appeal. The economy was definitely an additional thing. We were already pretty unhappy about Boston prices, but the idea of paying a fortune for a national just as everyone's stocks torpedoed pretty much sealed the deal. The third and less relevant factor was a general dislike of the fall tournament schedule. No national KO events and only 1 pair event in the middle instead of 2. If the fall schedule was a copy of the summer schedule (which it obviously won't be.. I know) we'd definitely give more consideration to fall nationals. As it is, there is already a preference amongst probably half of our group for mostly just considering Spring/Summer nationals. I dunno, maybe we are unique but I doubt it.. and I bet there were many people who were also turned off by the fact it was Boston who would have gone to a different location.

I keep getting this comment a lot and i think that we must be doing something wrong since we are constantly getting good result with our 2C opening :rolleyes: Since this is not true for any of the rest of us who have played precision with 2♣=5+ before, I think you are simply going to have to accept that people don't believe you on this point. ;) Not that you are lying, but that your memory is selective or that you have simply been extremely fortunate. will you open up 2♣ with 5 if your points are concentrated in clubs? I do occasionally if my other choices suck more, but curious if this is me lacking discipline or a "god I hate life" choice that we all make occasionally.

Blame depends on system. Double makes no sense given a normal system. Why isn't east bidding 4NT over 4♠? Assuming some alternate meaning for 4NT, and the X is takeout, then the fault must be with west. With no points and a long club suit, a pull to 5♣ is fairly trivial. My assumption is that fault probably lies with communication rather than an actual error. I suspect East thought X was takeout and west thought it was penalty. Nothing else really makes any sense.

You are upset about a ruling at a CLUB game?! There are obviously correct calls to make here, but the situation as described is hardly unique. I only know of one procedural penalty in the last 3 years in our unit, and it was based more on the director hating the person involved than any actual reason.

seems like passing 3♠ is only a LA if opener has 4 spades. If they do... not sure. If they don't, allowing a correction to a minor seems pretty easy.

the new schedule could definitely use some tweaks. Mixed Pairs being the only option in the fall kind of sucks. I am (personally) a fan of switching the location of the mixed pairs and the imp pairs in the new schedule. As it stands now.. those who have a solid male/female partnership will be fine while those who don't (and aren't senior citizens) will have jack all to do. On the platinum pairs, I disagree with raising the bar further. Heck, I think it should maybe be lowered a bit (at least the 3 year amount) and allow a solid finish (top 25? top 20?) in a national event also count for entry. 50 pp in 3 years sounds trivial to those who can go to 3 NABCs a year and have a solid partner/team for each. It is not so trivial for those of us with jobs/families/full time commitments who can barely scrape together the time/money to attend 1 NABC a year. I think the focus should be on insuring day 1 is solid. Day 1 is pretty crazy in the other pair events (at least the ones I've played) as there are no real requirements. Blue ribbons are a joke since you can get them in KOs and (I believe) for 1st/2nd in B in open pairs. Heck, I have 24 after playing bridge for 3 years. There are plenty of solid players who would /not/ damage the quality of play who are never going to hit 50 pp in 3 years because their life does not revolve around the bridge world. There is not 1 person (that I am aware of) in Oklahoma who would qualify, even the two(?) "professional" players in the state are nowhere near 50 pp in 3 years. I am probably closest after 13th in the fast pairs, but I'd still need another high finish in either Houston or whichever NABC I attend in 2010 since I can't attend 3 nationals a year like many people that post on this board. Solid field on day 1 is good, and is something no pairs event has. But I think the focus should be on insuring a solid field, and I don't think it requires 50 pp in 3 years to insure someone is a solid bridge player.

collegiates win doesn't count as a national championship win....

Not real sure how to respond to the poll... I don't think south made an error. I think north should absolutely have doubled. What if north was just dickering around trying to push them to 5? Without encouragement... there are 2 big ways that south jumping in could be wrong. Now once north makes the obvious double, south has the obvious pull. Also, if south has shortness in both black suits, 5♥ is likely toast so multiple ways to win for the double.

semi clever by east to give declarer a losing option. Declarer should take like 2 seconds and think about it though and then they will get it right. For the finesse to be right, east must have played the J from JT8 which makes no sense.

I'd start with a GF. There are a variety of strains where this could belong and starting with 2♣ lets us look for the correct strain more easily. 4♥, 4♠, and 3NT all look like possibilities right now. If it goes 1♥ 1♠ 2♥, now you really have no way to tell if 3NT or 4♥ will be better and basically just have to take a shot at it.

Given the location of the K of clubs.. I'm not sure that its a clear 4♠ bid. Most values are working, but the K♣ is questionable, no singleton, etc. If you need a heart finesse, it too is off. Given imps, I think 4♠ is a fairly normal bid but not an omg clear one. Over 4♦ and no x by partner, I think 4♠ at that point sounds a lot better than X. Calling 2♠ preemptive is just a complete departure from common sense. Don't let someone bully you into thinking you were wrong when you weren't :( As for ruling.. I think the contract should stand because the 2♠ by west and the x by east were both pretty crazy. However, N/S should a significant procedural penalty for the failures to alert. Nobody ever gives procedural penalties for crap like this and they really should.

The article seems like more of a telling situation than an asking situation. Aka I have a strong 2 suiter hand.. are we fitting? If so.. lets push towards slam. Or with a 1 suiter hand, I have a void in this suit and a pretty strong hand, if you don't have wasted values, lets push towards slam. For example ATxxxx KQxx AJT void Bidding might go 1♠ p 3♠ p 4♣ Now partner with Kxxx Ax Qxx Jxxx might take a push towards slam with only 1 wasted point in clubs. With a K or A wasted in clubs, they would close down the auction. On the other hand, if opener has: AJTxx Ax x AQTxx they could want to push towards slam if responder has the K of clubs.. maybe not so much if they don't. Both situations come up, and the issue is seeing both. If this is what the discussion is about (and it sounds like it), should work a lot like when people play both help suit and short suit game tries. Aka 1♠ p 3♠ p 4♣ shows the club suit 1♠ p 3♠ p 3NT p 4♣ p 4♠ shows a club void and mild+ slam interest. You lose the matchpoint 3NT and serious 3NT Intervening bids show interest in what opener has shown (aka a fit if a suit is shown, little to no wastage if a void is shown) and might even let the pair bid 7 if they find that uber magical hand where every card is working (although typically just getting to 6 on 25ish points is good).

Perfectly bid until North decided to bid 3 NT. That is a craaaazy bid. I completely agree with the launch partner into the sun comment.

I think 7♦ is fairly obvious. But why is your hand taking over the bidding with keycard? It seems like the other hand could ask all the intelligent questions and then get there easily on their own merits. There is the obvious issue of "weak partner", but constantly taking over in situations like these imo does not ever let them grow stronger. I think there was at least 1 and possibly 2 mistakes made on this hand before the 6♣ bid was made, and they were not the fault of the person w/ the void.

Yes, I am looking forward to playing the National KO event in Boston. OH WAIT, it excludes the 10% of us who are not over 55 yet. Senior events are retarded. If they are going to have senior events, they should at least move the age up to like 75 and stop treating them like open national events.. with platinum and a win considered a qualifier for grand master. I think there are like 20 people out of 640 in our whole unit who would not qualify for a senior event. Even the "young working crowd" can still mostly play in "senior" events.