42

Perhaps this issue has been discussed before, then sorry in advance B) Dummy You Qxx(...) AKJ(...) Partner is on lead and you win the trick in another suit. Obviously you want partner to play this suit. Which card do you play (or better: which card is the right one), the K or the A, to show your holding before you bring partner on lead again? And why?

Gerben, this busyness isn't fair. We get only a bit of informations, and not always the right and correct ones. They say one thing ("no, we are not involved") and do the opposite (in fact they are). Often money destroys (good) character :)

Do you think it is 5 to 12 to better sell all shares (of fonds)? Even the Russian and Asian ones?

Codo, I am with you (please reserve a dance for me in the Gewölbekeller!!! :) ). But to leave the score 4♠ -2 is hard (I would like to, of course) because the 2NT-bidder did not call the TD at the right time, she lost her rights imo. The probability is near 100% that the ep pair would have changed the bid to 4♠ dbl after the clarification that 2NT was intended to show minors, weak. The partner of the 2NT-bidder was convinced that she gave the correct explanation and that 2NT is -when not explicitely discussed and therefore not alerted- strong. Why should she be punished that she gave a "wrong" explanation? When a situation is not discussed or documentated there is no wrong or right, or? When all the world plays 2NT in this situation as minors + weak, why must the bid be alerted? Not every bidding misunderstanding creates necessarily a zero :)

Thx so far for your answers! I slightly edited the post (written in red): a.) the lady asked BEFORE she bid 4♥ (as far as I know). Interesting is also if and how it changes the decisions when the 4♥-bidress just bids without asking and her partner asks before passing :P b.) TD set the score to 4♠ dbl for -500 OT: hi fluffy, thx for your words yesterday :)

Hi all, yesterday someone told me this story which I now tell you because I felt doubts about the ruling. I was not involved in any way and I don't know the exact hands, I'm just interested in your opinions about this case in general ;) The situation in general: club tourney, teams. Better group of 2 (the playing strength varies from "expert" to "intermediate --"), occasional partnership meets experienced partnership, 4 ladies (or not :) at the table, 2 of the ladies are known to - let's say - never hide personal opinions and the truth is not always relevant). The bidding (ep white, op red): ep: 1♥ (op: 2NT*) ep: 4♥ (op: 4♠) all pass * not alerted, occasional partnership. Before she bid, the 4♥-bidress asked what 2NT meant and received the answer "strong". 4♠ was down 2 for -200, 4♥ makes. TD is called. ep: "Had we known that 2NT was for minors and weak we would have doubled 4♠ for -500" op: "We play for the 1. time and didn't discuss this 2NT. The 4♠-bidress normally doesn't play in the highest group." TD sets the score to 4♠ dbl -2 for -500. op wants to call the arbitration committee. TD says: "When you do this you must pay a deposit of 30,- Euro" (this was never done and never discussed before in the club). The committee decides very quickly that the score stands (reasoning: "it is standard that 2NT is for minors and weak. Who plays in the highest group must know this") In the meantime 1 lady of the ep calls a lady of the op to be a liar (and we don't know what else). op will call another committee to punish the ep ("zero tolerance"). Do you think that the decisions are all ok? Is the protest frivolous? Which committee should decide what? [Do you want to play there? I prefer to stay at home.... *this is my personal frustration-statement*] The edited passages are written in red :) Sorry that I missed it before!

The title says already all :rolleyes: Stay as positive and cute as you are! ♥ "Wie schön, dass du geboren bist, wir hätten dich sonst sehr vermisst!" Lalalalala

Luke warm, Gerben!!!!! Thank you so much! I was here only occasionally, sorry.... What a nice surprise :P ♥♥♥♥♥♥

just deleted the double posting...

OT: Making the last trick with ♦7 in the trump suit is worth 2 beers B) Back to this hand: I wonder which contract would be reached when it could be opened in first seat. Does anyone open 2♣?? I think I would open 2NT, but then it is not clear how the bidding proceeds, since 3♣ ist (puppet-)stayman. Will partner bid game with his 6th ♦J? Yes, Winston, I saw also that we will have some problems after 2♠ where the strong hand is still undescribed according to distribution. But it seems that I am very lonely with my pessimistic view... And as the cards lie, the optimists are right :)

[hv=d=n&v=b&n=s109xhdj987xxc9xxx&s=saqxhaj7xxdaqxxca]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Lead: ♠8. After a long thought I chickenlike decided to bid 2♥ (my second choice would have been 2♠, third choice 3NT) which became the final contract. Due to a bad defence I made the contract :lol: The ♦K was a singleton and therefore the slam in ♦ was cold, also immediately analyzed by opps. I knew that my bid was nonforcing, but with such a weak 6card ♦-suit I would have been bidding 3♦ with the N hand because it is completely worthless in a ♥-contract, imo. Hit me, please ;) Would anyone bid the ♦-slam?? I think it isn't biddable, but who am I? @Jillybean: I only mentioned the ♥7 to underline the bad quality of the ♥-suit. And I like 7s, not as much as 42s, but still... Best is ♦7 and to make the last trick with it for a beer or 2 :) :-*

Justin, what do you expect partner to bid after 2♠? NT is out, he won't bid 3 cards of ♥, so the most likely bid will be 3♣ or 3♦, or? And then? Going for ♥s then? Raise ♦s?

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=saqxhaj7xxdaqxxca]133|100|Scoring: IMP pass (1♠) DBL (pass) 2♦ (pass) ?[/hv] What are your thoughts and hopes?

We played stoneage precision (guess why ;)): a suit bid shows 5 cards... So she was trying to warn me with 2♣ which could be only 4 cards. A forcing pass didn't come into my mind for the reasons that Robert mentioned.

Hi :) Yes, ugly hand... My very exerienced partner (North, 84 years old and still very flexible in her mind) said that she never had such a problem before :blink:. I asked another partner of mine and he proposed a DOUBLE after 1♣ (p) 1NT (2♥) // DBL = pen , also after 1♠ (p) 1NT (2♥) // DBL = pen I wondered how many players would find a clearsighted penalty DBL here with a possible ♠-fit... How the bidding went on in reality: 1♣ (p) 1NT (2♥) 2♠ (p) 3♣ (p) 3NT (thinking §$%&/§ but pretending to be cooooooool ;)) The ♠Q was offside - what else...

I tried some hands :D With this partner I played precision, but I am interested in other systems, too. If someone plays Polish Club: is it a 1♣ opening (18+)? [hv=d=s&v=b&n=sxxh10xxdqxxxcakxx&s=sakjxxhaxxdkxxcqj]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] South opens whatever his system tells him, W passes, N bids in many systems 1NT, nasty E interferes with 2♥. a.) 1♣(!) (p) 1NT (2♥) // ? b.) 1♠ (p) 1NT (2♥) // ? Ok, now you can see both hands, but I would like to ask you to decide as if you don't do ;) Thx :) Caren

I was about to return....

Happy birthday, Justin! A year runs really fast, I still remember your last birthday... My best wishes for the next 80 years :D Caren

Hi all (who know me), after 20 years my love for bridge got lost and I retire (at least I will take a longer break). There are many different reasons for that which I do not want to explain here further, but to go without a word just does not seem to be right because I participated from the very first days on, met many friends and nice persons here and learned a lot. ♥A special "thank you" to Fred, Sheri and Uday♥ for a good time and the many possibilities to play and improve here and on BBO! Best wishes and have fun! Bridge is still a nice game and life is short :) Yours, Caren

Herzliche Glückwünsche auch von mir, lieber Arend!! Ich war nicht zu Hause, deshalb zu spät.... Ich wünsche dir ein tolles neues Lebenjahr! Telefonieren ist jetzt leider zu teuer geworden, dabei gäbe es immer so viel zu erzählen. Wirst du wieder mit Tangotanzen anfangen? :D Dein nachträgliches Geburtstagsständchen ist "Tango" von Albeniz. Viele liebe Grüße! Caren

Ho capito bene che O non ha nessun ♠ e W ha 5?? Ha! Ed io ho detto le ♠ sono 4-1... :rolleyes: Non ho voluto giocare subito un ♠, quindi non sono una persona normale (ma questo non è nuovo. Un amico mi ha detto una volta: "perché giochi sempre gli atouts alla prima possibilità? Aspetta!" E poi ho avuto un "atout-trauma"...). Cattivo opp! Chi ha dato le carte? (Le donne sgridano a questo punto primo di pensare. Non ho gia una soluzione.... e domani e dopo domani e dopo dopo domani non sono a casa...) A sabato :P

Grazie :rolleyes: Ho detto X perché ho voluto mostrare che non sono debole :rolleyes: [hv=n=sjxh108xdakqjxxxcj&w=sxxxhxxxxdxxxcqxx&e=sa10xxxhqdxckxxxxx&s=skqxhakj9xdxxcaxx]399|300|[/hv] 1♥ (p) 2♦ (2♠) X (p) 3♥ (p) 4♥ I got what I deserved :o

Ciao amici :o Oggi ho giocato. Sempre questi problemi.... Ho [hv=d=s&v=b&s=skqxhakj9xdxxcaxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv]. Giochiamo Polish Club e dico 1♥ (passo) 2♦=GF, naturale, può avere ♥-fit. Ora il cattivo opp mette 2♠ sul tavolo. Che dite? 1♥ (p) 2♦ (2♠) ? Saluti e buona domenica! Caren

Sì, sì, la tentazione.... Hai ragione (naturalmente!), ma questa volta il sentimento ha vinto :) Un piacere leggerti!! Grazie!

Ciao :) Sono ritornata a casa... Abbiamo giocato un torneo inividuale. Tutti hanno saputo giocare ma che cosa hai saputo del sistema in generale dopo 1SA è Stayman e transfer ma solo --> majore :huh: Qualche gioca 2♠= domanda min / max o transfer --> MINORE, qualche gioca 2SA = i minori ma altri giocano 2SA = inv. . Molto difficile: forse 3SA è ottimale, forse 4♥/♠, forse 5/6♦, chissa? Ho deciso licitare 2♣ Stayman, partner: 2♦ (*hehe, gioca LUI in ogni caso). Pausa lungo. Che cosa è 4♦? Domanda 1:assi, domanda 2: cuebid?? Con il mio partner a casa mostra una mano con 4♥/♠ + 6+♦, invita slam (--> 'sì': partner risponde il numero dei assi). Ma i ♦ devono essere meglio :( Il problema più grande è il ♣ renonce, non posso mostrarlo. Il slam dipende sui ♣ che ha il partner. A volte ascolto che il mio sentimento mi dica (se non ho una risposta), e mi ha detto: 3SA non va, e anche 6♦ non va, quindi 5♦. Normalmente odio anch'io questo contratto e il mio partner non ha sorriso... Ho sperato che il partner mi capisce e dice 6 senza qualcosa in ♣, giochiamo "pairs" (una volta a Bologna è stato un successo, ha capito e detto 6 loll). 3 minuti più tardi: TOP, perché ♦ 3-1 con DF10 in una mano e la ♠D dietro il F; 3SA è stato down con il ♣ lead Ha avuto ♠ Axx ♥ Axx ♦ Axx ♣ Axxx. Una licitazione femminile... felice... Lungo - corto: anch'io penso che lungo e meglio ;) Ottimale è lentamente --> lungo veloce --> corto (ad esempio: splinter; o giochiamo 1SA - 3♥/♠ = corto, altra majore = 3)