TylerE

Have you considered folding this into a 2♠ ♣ transfer? That would seem superior., since it frees up the 3♥/3♠ bids for something (IMO) more productive (Like showing major suits, or 3M1M5m4m type hands with specific shortness)

Ok, I suppose I should now own up to the actual horrible auction I perpetrated. p-(p)-1♥-(p) 1♠-(2♦)-3♦-(4♦) 4♠-(p)-6♣-(p) 7♣-AP Partner held: [hv=s=sakxxxhqtdxxctxxx]133|100|Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good...[/hv]

3♥. Trying to get responder to bid 3N with some ♣ stuff. Playing 2/1 (especially) 3♦ shows a fairly decent hand.

What if you had the agreement that 3♣ is forcing. (Meta-agreement...new suit by UPH 100% forcing). (And yes, it was this exact doubt that led to the somewhat comical (but lucky!) auction that resulted. I won't give the full auction (yet), but I'll just say I found Kx of ♣ onside in the grand...

Playing sound 2/1 style. What's you[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sqhakjxxxdacaqxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP p-(p)-1♥-(p) 1♠-(2♦)-? [/hv] Once you've decided on your first bid, read this hidden:

Other: 12-14 if playing a standardish 5CM system 10-12 playing strong club at favorable or equal (inc. r/r) 1st-3rd 12+-15 playing strong club at unfavorable and in 4th

Responder showed a limit raise with spades.

64 for me also, despite getting gooseeggs on the last 2.

Only opener's rebids (and I don't feel strongly that 2N-3[CL}-3M is alertable). This is one of those currently required alerts that are more likely to benefit (an unethical) responder than opponents.

Specifically in answer to #3, this is the style I have adopted in my main partnership. That said, for us 1♦-1♥-1NT is 13-15 (1♣ is Precision).

But what if the "legal" 1♥ call was judged to be wild or gambling? (Which it pretty much is by definition...)

Yes, but only because I play a 10-12 NT.

Also, as a side note, I am extremely skeptical that an specific arrangement of 52 cards is copyrightable. Any commentary or analysis, sure, but the deal itself?

Pass. Assuming the system is sort of standard, 2NT here should be like 15- a bad 17. Would be helpful to know if: 1N was forcing, and B: What a 1NT opening would be (Range, 5M?, etc)

No 2♥ isn't a GF, but if you take a freebid here you're pretty much doing so. Partner can (and almost certainly will) act over 2♠.

Pass. Any bid is too likely to get us to a hopeless game. Playing a limited opening system 3♣ is clear, assuming 1♦ is limited to 15 or so.

Paaaaaasss. I would need to be at least 5-5, if not 6-5 to act with these values at these colors. WvR and 4♠. looks to be more attractive.

4♠ and signifigant extas.

GIB tends to be fairly conservative with reverses, so I'd suggest you do the same...with the given hand I'd just rebid 2♦

I think N/S deserve each other.

3♠, IMO a wtp even for B/I.

The GIBs at a table are run locally, right? Maybe run one more in the background in double dummy mode, and once all possible lines of play result in the same # of tricks initiate a claim? Maybe start doing this with 5 or 6 cards remaining so the computational overhead isn't too high.

That's pretty neat. Only suggestion I would make is to use 'X' instead of 'D' for doubles, both because X is of course standard, and D looks too close to P.

Ahh, ok. Well, I'm open for partnerships (Can play in the later session on the 21st, and the finals), with the caveat that I've never had any contact or involvement with WBF, have no clue what my player # is, etc. I would like to participate though as 2009 is my last year as a junior under WBF rules...

Ok, first I'll give my auction using my system of choice. I fully acknowledge that this is way beyond most B/I players, just want to give a taste of science. 1♣ (16+, Forcing) - 1NT (GF with 5+ ♣) 2♣ (Suit quality ask, usually shows a fit) - 3♣ (6+ ♣, 2 of AKQ) 3♥ (Ask in Hearts) - 4♣ (2nd Round control) 4♦ (Ask in Spades) - 4♠ (3rd Round control...must be XX since opener holds Q) 4NT (Re ask in Hearts) - 4♦ (Kx(xx)) 7NT (6+3+3+1 = 13) Playing standard systems... 2♣ - 3♣ 3♠ - 4♣ 4NT (1430) - 5♣ 5♦ (Queen?) - 5♥ (Yes + K♥) 7N