TylerE

Imo, all of them, but just because he's lucky that everything is onside/breaking. Stated line is K♣, running diamonds from the top, and then playing a spade to dummy.

Negative inferences are not generally alterable, so I think you're fine. The one exception I'd draw is if you're using it in situations other than opening 1N where partner actually is breaking the relay occasionally. Then you might explain that bidding 3♣ denies a game forcing single suiter or whatever.

I never said I get to 4♥...given the start of the auction, if you're sticking me with it, 3N is more likely. But I'm 100% never stopping in 3D.

Plenty to go aroumd here. The first mistake was North's 1♦. X is much better. Given the 1♦ bid South's 1N is very heavy. Given 1D-1N, I can't really fault 3♦, since S is unlikely to hold [h]. Souths final pass is execrable, a massive undervaluation. If you are going to make the bloated 1N call, you must be willing to bid some game when partner shows signs of life.

That's....troubling, frankly. Login details at the very least should be encrypted.

No, that's just the number of combinations of 13 different cards...hands not deals. Deals would be hugely higher.

Birthday paradox doesn't apply to this situation at all, I'm not even sure I follow your logic at all really. In addition, your math is way wrong. Number of bridge hands = C(52,13) = 635,013,559,600 If you were capable of playing bridge from the moment of birth, played 20 hands an hr, 24 hours a day until you were 100, you'd play about 17.5M hands in your lifetime. And again, that's at a totally unsustainable pace of 420 hands a day. That would mean you would play less than 1/36000 of the possible hands.

What class are the players involved, especially west?

I had an even funnier instance of this happen the other night... RHO Gib decides to overcall 1N after I opened and partner responded, and after I whacked it for penalty ran out...into the suit I opened! Juicy 1100 on the right side of the scorecard for once. Of course, gave most of the IMPs back a few boards later when CHO GIB finally decides to mention his 8 card suit at the 7 level. http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?myhand=M-27484321-1396237681

Just use the Ctrl key when clicking the forum list on the search page. Easy multi-select.

Honestly, I would lead K!H at trick one and consider it obvious at IMPs. In the position I switch to a [h]. For one, look at your hand! That club suit isn't that menacing. Declarer might get as many as 2 pitches...but if he does he has LOTS of red cards and our tricks aren't going anywhere.

The 2♠ jump shift is strong in SAYC. Even logic says it can't be by a passed hand the SAYC notes make no such distinction.

or to just open a weak 2 if it's going to insist on the suit. [hv=pc=n&s=skq964hjdajcakjt7&n=s5ha97642dq5c9642&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=ppp1sp1np3cp3hp3np4hp4sppp]266|200[/hv]

In what galaxy, nee UNIVERSE, is W's hand a strong hand for this sequence. If he was 5-0-4-4 I might be able to give that some credence, but I see a hand full of downgrades (Bad-ish 5 bagger, xx in opps suit, Qx clubs). The diamond fit is about the only thing I'd actually be happy about as west.

My understanding is that the same code is used. The only difference is a (significant) difference in the amount of CPU horsepower allocated.

1♠-(p)-1NT-(2♦) X? What's X?

Honestly this sounds silly. Fake internet points that aren't even tallied (scores at normal tables) don't matter.

I've been playing the following, which I (semi-jokingly, but sort of accurately) call reverse reverse 3-way drury 2♣ = 4 card raise, not total junk (so like 6-12ish) 2♦ = 3 card limit 2M = 3 card <limit After 2♣, 2♦ is an artificial ask/try. Responder bids 2M with the lower range (6-bad 9) and anything else shows a good 9+, and is basically natural/game try style. (NB: This includes p-1♠-2♣-2♦-2♥!) Hands that want to play 2♣ get to bid 1NT, and play it like a real bridge player - especially at MP 2♣ is not a spot I basically ever want to be in

If you're concerned about this sort of thing, I'd just recommend giving up the jump to 3♣ as a WJS, and playing 1x-(2x) = Michaels, always both majors over a 1m opening, and Other major + ♦ over 1M openings 1x-(2N) = Two lowest 1x-(3♣) = Top + Bottom (e.g. if opener opened 1♣, 3♣ shows ♦ and ♠) This way advancer ALWAYS knows what the two suits are and can act accordingly.

Again, being MPs, I ahve a hard time believing ANYTHING is SWEoG when one holds the spade suit.

Maybe allow doubles all the time? (But no advancing the X unless RHO passes obv).

Probabilties for the following setup? 1♣ = 11-13 Bal (No 5M) or 3+ ♣ 1♦ = 17-18 (Semi)Bal (5M or 6M322 possible) or 3+ ♦ 1M = 11-13 5+M or 11-21 5+M unbalanced 1N = 14-16 2♣ = 19-21 Bal or Any GF+ Minor suit opened might be distorted for range considerations if unwilling to rebid longer minor (e.g. 1♣ could be on 2♣+5 bad ♦ if minimum, intending to rebid 1N)

I'm really surprised by a lot of these responses. For me, CLEARLY the most important even of at least the last 200 years was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand of Austria in 1914. If that doesn't happen WWI doesn't happen, which has the knock on effect of not decimating Germany with the armistice so the Nazis and thus WWII and thus the cold war never happen.

Passing 4♥ is just failure to play bridge.

File Under: If the game was that easy, we wouldn't play it. Seriously, s--t happens. Not a hand worth obsessing over imo. At my table the W hand would probably be opened a strong NT and east would texas with 4♦.