TylerE

Wouldn't the same issue seem to point to them being allowed for opening leads?

I♠. Because A 6.5 trick hand with not all that much defense (relatively speaking) isn't a 2♣ opener.

On what basis? I don't see anything in the GCC about leads at all. The carding section refers to plays when following suit and discards. Carding and Leads are two seperate headings on the Convention Card.

Just remember that -4 Xed still beats their game, and partner doesn't have to be broke here.

1♥. I think X is practically terrible. This is NOT AQ AQJxxx xx Axx

1D-1H 3D-3H 4H Looks pretty normal. I think 3♦ by north is pretty much a wtp.

I think the key to this hand is to trust declarer. They're not bidding 3N here without solid diamonds... They'll hold QTxx here prob. 80% of the time once partner drops the 9 at T1.

Auction looks ok. I switch to a ♣ at trick 2.

That ain't a power double.

Misread the poll. Thought it refered to 1m auctions specifically. So, on reflection: When 1NT is NF: X = Penalty When 1NT is F: X = Takeout

Penalty as best imo. Opener already has a decent idea of responders shape so no need for takeout.

I think it's a very poor treatment. Sure the raise is better defined when it's actually made, but your 1NTF sequences, which are overloaded to begin with, are even worse. Also, in the modern game the 1N bid gets overcalled far more often and the fit may get shut out. Plus, as lightly as many make limit raises these days, whats the actual range? 8 to a bad 9? That seems a terrible waste of a bread-and-butter sequence.

This thread baffles me. What exactly is the "offending" side supposed to do, refuse to explain when asked about an alert?

Old fashioned doesn't always mean bad. I also think the people raising to 2M on 3 more than 10% of the time are nuts...

If you're going to play 3N opposite spades, why are we staymaning?

And when partner has a club invite? When partner bids expecting you to be short in ♦? I don't think it's nearly as clearcut as you suggest. The point is you expect partner to be able to listen to the auction and balance when appropriate.

If you can double with min offshape like that, how do you bid with any accuracy over takeout doubles?

+1 on not doubling with the sound hand...

My mistake. TBH I really should have looked through all the old stuff before making the post. Been insanely busy at work lately (I've worked something like 170 hours in the last 3 weeks) so I haven't quite been with it in general. My post wasn't intended as any sort of personal attack against you or the way the contest is being run. I think you are doing an excellent job of it. Way better than I could for sure!

Well, it just seems to keep changing. Initially it was matches...then not matches but a 50% duble elim, now something much tighter...I mean I know it needs to end sometimes, but these cuts just feel overly harsh.

Not a format where potentially coming 4th out of 14 is counted as a loss.

When did the low bracket go from being a 50% survivor to a 30% survivor? I strongly feel that the cut factor for the bottom bracket should be the same as a top. With this setup it's possible for a pair to be eliminated while only being in the bottom part of the field once, which feels wrong for a double elimination contest.

As a side hypothetical.... what if 2♦ was played as many in NA do, promising an A, K, or better.

1♣ - 1♠ 2NT(forcing) - 3♣ (Checkback) 3♠ - 4♥ 4nt - 1 Q? - no 6♠ Even 1♣-1♠-4N etc isn't ludacris.

Bid something that ain't 3NT.