TylerE

You do realise that 4♥ is a fairly bad contract, right?

Given that 1st is far enough ahead of the field, I consider that somewhat unlikely, since you basically have to blitz every match to have a lead that big...and it's hard to be that high in a reasonably sized swiss after getting blitzed even once.

Agree RE: 3NT. A 3N bid looks something like: Ax Kxx xx AKQJxx imo. Whoever said that...I'd go beyond just ignoring and actively suggest you solicit their advice, and then file it under 'never ever ever do this.'

Oh, sorry, edited

[hv=d=w&v=b&s=sat9874h3dk543c92]133|100|Scoring: MP (1♦) - 2NT - (3NT) - AP[/hv]

[hv=v=b&s=s4h75432d3caqjt73]133|100|(1♦) - 2NT[/hv] ALL RED

Tim - Note the system...1♥ is limited to 15 highs

Partner bids 2♠ over 2!H, 4 ♠ and 4+ ♦

[hv=d=s&v=b&s=sthakqjtxdckqjtxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP You open a strong club, partner bids 2♦ showing 5+ ♦, and 8+ HCP, GF[/hv] Assume for purposes of discusion more or less old school prec... no mad scientist asking bids or relays.

I know BBO doesn't really collect personal information. I know they DO allow players to register an ACBL number...

Pass. I've shown what I have...the trumps are nice, but I have no shortness to make good use of them. I'll consider myself grateful if we chalk up +130.

Rather well actually ;)

Don't confuse basic conventions with knowledge of a system. Who, off the top of their head, can answer the following questions (according to SAYC): 1D-(3♣)- X = ? (1NT) - 2♣ = ? 1♥ - p - 2♠ = ? 1♥ - p - 1♠ - p - 1NT - p - 2♣ = ? 1♣ - p - 2NT = ?

HUH?? I see nothing natural or intuitive about that. Furthurmore, I know of no one, even rank novices who would play it that way.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakjxhakjt9xdkxcx]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1NT (12+ - 15) - ? Usual expertish agreements in place (Smolen, Texas, etc)[/hv] What's your plan and where do you think you are headed? If you stayman, partner not surprisingly bids 2♦. Part 2 - We have a 3♥ bid that shows a 6-4 Major hand (either way), GF+. After the auction 1N-3♥-3NT-4♣-4♥, you find that partner has no major Kxx or better, and a heart preference. Take it away.

Lol, erm, if you say so. Sure you don't have the blame rotated 180 degrees?

Could be a singleton, not promising a void. If you cue 4♠ p does indeed bid 5♣

Who about this: Doubles that show length in unbid suit(s), penalty of a shown strain or extra values are not alertable. All other doubles are alertable.

It's actually possible for this auction to make sense, if the player's aren't on the same page. 2♣ - Strong 2♦ - Waiting 2♥ - Kokish Relay (Normal GF in ♥, or 25-26 Balanced, forces 2♠, in theory...) 3♥ - Heart support 4NT - 3014 / Reg. BW 5♣ - 0 5♦ - Asking for Q♥

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sqhajxxdxxxxckxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP 1♣ - 1♥ 4♦ - ?[/hv]

I'd say: X = Pure Penalty P = Full Opening, mild game interest, invites partner to X for penalty, partner is expected to take a bid 3Something Else = Your normal game try 3M = Subminimum hand

With the caveat that what that page says and what GIB actually plays might, erm, differ.

DONT is really, really horrendous against a mini-NT, or even a weak NT. You really need to have some sort of system with a Penalty X. My recommendation is a slightly modified HELLO: X = Penalty (Doesn't need to be balanced, or have a ton of high cards, Just a hand with 7+ defensive tricks) 2♣ = Relay to 2♦, Shows ♦ or a M/m (With the M/m you bid the M over 2♦, then 2N by partner asks for the minor] 2♦ = Hearts 2♥ = Both Majors 2♠ = Spades 2NT = Clubs or Near-GF in ♦/♥/♠ (The strong variant is shown by bidding a new suit once partner bids 3♣ 3♣ = Minors 3♦ = Both Majors, strong (e.g. partner should bid game in the desired strain with 1.5 tricks or so...or even no tricks and 4+ in a M) 3M = Preemptive but sound (e.g. willing to play 3Mx opposite shortness)

I think the second half of Watson is excellent. The first half is ok...the information is good, but the prose leaves quite a bit to be desired. That said, I know of no other single volume that covers the range from simple finesses through complicated squeezes in a single volume.

Honestly, that sequence makes no real since. Opener has denied a max with 3♥, so that only hand that remotely makes sense is a min with 3♥...which should probably pass 2♥. Maybe a distributional min, like 4=3=5=1 or 4=3=6=0 maybe?