Tola18

I happened me the other day. The computer has some difficulties with loading the BBO. And thus Im "blind" some time. Being inside but not seeing any chat. And a automated message comes: A seat reserved for you at XXxx table. Do you want it? I dont know any XXxx and still have problems, so I say no. But I get also a vaguely rememberance such thing happened before. I tried to ask if I WAS invited, and get no answer. And today, same thing. Slow inloading, a reserved seat by somebody unknown. Ie apparently a bug wandering around....

Yes. You suspect it is a misunderstanding, partner perhaps thinking your 2NT was naturally inviting. If opps understand it is misunderstanding, they will prob give business-double. By saying partner has 22 points you save yourself from the double... Quick thinking, but not quite ethical... The correct, like other said, is to say: undiscussed or something similiar.

You're in a GF auction. 2NT to me implies a dislike of spades, and unlimited count. It could be very, very strong- a hand that plans to start a cue bid sequence next or just wants to hear what opener has to say. I play this auction denies 3 spades. It does not, however, promise a balanced or semibalanced hand. Yes. I agree. The key here it is a GF-situation, and the principle of slow-approach is on. Thus 2NT may be stronger than 3NT - probably is stronger. North wants to hear more details from opener. End contract may be NT, but may be something else... Thus, if opener want to throw in a slam, he must begin from the lowest possible slam, here 6Diamonds = pass or correct. That principle always when you understand the sequence is strong, but you are not sure which suit to play it: ALWAYS bid out the lowest possible suit - pass or correct. It is so unnecessary to play 7 minus one, with the 6 cold. ................... I do also agree with JTfanclub on example nr 1.

I had during a period played a home-made system when ALL suit 1-openings were normally 5+. Exceptions were of course the 4441 hands and 18-19 NT. Otherwise everthing natural. Worked OK! The trick to make the 5-openings possible was by playing with 13-17NT. With time, we did worked up sequences to nuance what we had and how many points. But frankly, it wasnt necessary. In the beginning we had it raw. Our common NT-scheme and 13-17NT. With some careful invitings...We didnt see any missed contracts or faults. Of course, we didnt compete against first class adversaries....

Ah, better an unknown usurper or forger than the usual Evil Twin. Thus no shadow on your family! :(

Im thinking. You unlucky guys did quite a lot to get on yourself these most unlucky bans. Although one of my bridge friends did get banned after a evening with bad connection (and a multiple short disconnections in a tourney playing with me) But it also means, a normal player with a normal connection can ban and or left in midplay several times each session without anything happening! Ie, you can be quite a nasty player, abandoning several hands in midplay every day. This being apparently not unusual. A mild three-days ban occurs first when you are more or less actively making sabotage on the activities, setting in system go in, play a couple of hands, left in midplay. Immediately next table, same, and same and same... I dont think the setting is too harsh, I think it is rather too mild.

OK, here it was a half psyche. But what if it would be called a inviting trial-bid? Some do use them with a side-suit. Other do use them with a short/useless suit. If it was a pick-up partner, you arent quilty to tell exactly what it was-opps can make same quess as partner. The only odd here is partner COULD accept the invite and bid 4hearts at once as he is nearly maximum, instead of the tame 3H. Your 4H, against partners negative 3H - is rather odd. But poorly bidding isnt the same as unallowed psyche only because you had maximal luck. :)

I have no experience of chat rooms, but cant you use a common playing room as chat-room? Besides. I get the knowledge the other day you can rise from the player seat onto kibitzer seat (by clicking on your seat) - and as kibitzer you have some extra possibilities a player dont have. It would perhaps do the trick for you??

The most important denotion here is it is "competitive"; NOT businessdouble for punishment. This the more important, as D after preemt is usually for punisment (good for all lower intermediates to know). But exactly what competitive means knows hopefully the pair...

yes, quite. I did read somewhere a lenghy great article by Cohen about partnership. And there he explicitly explains this. His old partner Bergen loves complicated inventions. His new partner Berkowitz plays it simple. Him somewhere in between. But he DID choosed Berkowitz uncomplicated system, still being good friend with Bergen...

this thread shows another weak point: It is possible to write up people only in vacant seats. It should resolve many problems if it was possible to write up the coming player while the seat is still occupied. Occupied either by a living person or by this provisoric X, as mentioned. Something like: Next player is:

Swapping declarer would be also a useful device when playing with mentor: To let the pupil play as much as possible. Or, if the pupil did had many declaring - to let himher rest a while... It is possible to rise from your seat onto kibitz, and thereafter swap seats, but not all know this. And there may be different complications. Among them you cant have automatic fill-in of opponents.

Guys. Could it be they had some sort of mix-up? Wrong bidding to wrong text? Two different lessons interchanged feks. This could explain theirs these funny comments.

How perceptive of you! I have been looking at these clues for over a year to gather ideas for lesson material and have never had a quibble with anything signed by Mike Lawrence (as about half of the answers on the site are.) Actually, I suspect Im wrong. I have always assumed it was a site by Lawrence. One minute ago I looked at Lawrence own site, and clearly see The clues ARENT his own site but Anne Lunds and Leonard Lidstrom, but probably with cooperation of Lawrence. My fault!

What bothers me most here with the question, is XX is hardly the SOS redouble for escape here, as nothing says the D is for punishment. Bad lesson for the lesser experienced. Thus here XX should be the traditional showing strengh... Next; whatewer it was, it may still be according to the bidding: 12+12 points + 5 non vulnerable, leaves 11 for the redouble which may be OK... (partner with good distribution may even have some point less, thus E-W some point more) And yes, a penalty pass may still be the best. I would pass. Moreover, I notice the question isnt by Lawrence, but by someone other. Apparently the site broadens its horisonts. EDIT. Possibly mistake by me. Look my post further down.

For comments, it is necessary not only you and your partner want to, but also opps want and allow. Very often they arent fond in more than short remarks with partner. Next point, if we play with people of different languages, it is seen as rude to talk with partner in our language. And not all partners can good english... Third. It is not uncommon comments are either more or less rude, or ironic. So even friendly comments may sometimes be mistaken for ironic. Thus, it is often better not to say anything. But yes, the observation is correct. There are relatively few discussions on bridge.

I think this is a useful proposition. Thus I second it.

Do they often play with clients? Ie, as I know they arent known for extensive playing with clients.

An interesting example of auction in bridge! Or Auction bridge if you want! :P

Interesting. A sort of reversed Drury, not opener showing but the answerer showing! :wacko: Why not. It it perhaps better to let the still undiscovered opener make the asking.

I think this is an interesting idea, especially playing against systems when the minor may be less then 4 cards - and frequently is. I for one will think about it.

Before reading Kenrexfords last analysis, I though: 1nt ok, 2sp ok, the conventional D ok, 3H OK, 3NT somewhat cautious, but if not sure about slam it is often good to play sure 3nt in MP. 4H - yes dubious, but 3H could perhaps be on only 4 hearts... 4NT great = choose minor! 5C natural, 6C - who plays 5C in pairs, when there is 3NT to be made with extra trick on sheer raw-force?? Nay, we must take the shot at the 6C. 6C as seen excellent contract, with throws on diamonds. All in all, a quite good bidding, with only the 4H somewhat dubious. 4C at least as good; if pard has 3hearts he will bid them before playing a minor.

Your partner has the same information. Ie he knows you are short in spades. D should be the usual in such situations; take out with four in the other major, with some defensive possibilities if partner wish to pass for punishment (having some defensive trick together with the spades or short in the other major). 2NT = choose minor.

He perhaps dont play with splinter, thus he dont know we have diamonds together. But of course in this case he has a tremendous two-suiter.

good suggestion. Especially as often YOU were invited by someone you dont know - paired with a unknown partner. Its not entirely easy to search up someone you dont have among friends. And the torurnament invitations are often coming only minutes before start. It would be nice to get at once in connection with your new partner.