TylerE

I think in general it is hard for a truly limited bid to be 100% forcing. Another example would be passing a 2♦ Stayman responce with a garbage-type hand.

No the 2nd: It is considered perfectly normal to pass a Precision 2♦ opening, showing typically 4=4=1=4 shape and 10-15, with something like xx xx Qxxxxxx x

The difference is, if we have a heart fit *I don't care* if the clubs get buried. The opposite is much worse, especially at matchpoints.

Assuming, of course, your opponents who hold 9+ ♠ politely stay quiet the entire time. That doesn't happen against opponents with a pulse.

1♥. I think the 1♣ openers will struggle to get partner to actually realize we're 5-6 after a reverse.

Are we aware of the same BBO? The last decade of BBO is a string of bungled chances. If anyone else came along that was even half way competent they would eat BBO's lunch.

Hamman's law time. Do I have an active reason to not play 3N? No? Then I'm playing 3N.

Where I have a problem with that logic is that somehow a psyche plus a random jack ceases to be a psyche. That just doesn't make sense.

BBO director wrong. News at 11.

The problem is, if you do that this on this hand, you will find partner doesn't beleive you when you hold x AKxx AKQxx Kxx. Don't be the boy who cried wolf. This hand is NOT that good. Not even CLOSE to that good.

In the US, at least, this is totally untrue. There is no right to privacy in public.

Variation by vulnerability IS allowed everywhere I know of. What isn't is. "I play 12-14 NT, he plays 15-17".

X of 1♠ by N.

The cardinal rule: Do not balance at imps. (Yes, technically this isn't a balancing bid, but it's an analogous situation). They haven't bid 4!S yet. Don't give them a chance to upgrade their stiff !C holding.

As usual, when you are finding yourself stuck for a rebid, the real problem was your previous bid. To join the chorus: X the first time. Having made this bed, you must now lie in it with a pass. Double would show a lot more than this.

Seems pretty straightforward to me... 1♠-2♥-2♠-4♠. I'd *like* to have a little more for 2♥, but we have a 6 card suit, so...

This a browser thing, not anything BBO can control.

If you're playing goulash expecting bridge, you're doing it wrong.

OP's partner opened a weak NT, and OP simply signed off in 4♠ with ♠AKQ986 ♥AQJT ♦xx ♣x

Having found the hand in question.. let's just say that the issue on this hand is NOT what was opened.

1NT.

You want to make the hands "more random" by making them less random? A fair coin can come up tails 10 times in a row.

Your're result merchanting in the worst way.

3♦ for me at all forms of scoring and vulnerability, and frankly I don't think it's close.

Seems like the 2 partners deserve each other. Very timid all around.