TylerE

LOL. Can I play money bridge against you?

I think it is far more important in any case that the opposing team have access to the notes...

While I usually leave mine on, I don't blame or at all hold it against those that turn it off. When trying to mentally analyze a deep posistion, the constant "buzzing" can be very distracting.

Opener A73,A2,KQJ4,KQJ7 opposite KQ542,97,AT5,AT7 In my big club method: 1♣ - 1♥ (Spades, GF) 1♠ (suit ask) - 2♦ (Exactly 5♠, 2 of top 3) 2♥ - (relay ask in ♣) - 3♦ (Ace or Void) 3♠ - clarifying - 4♣ - Ace 4♦ (ask in ♦ - 5♣ Ace or Void 5♥ - clatifiying - 5NT Ace 6♣ - heart ask - 6♥ - 3rd round control (Qxx(x) or xx) ? whatever Not sure if I really want to risk grand here, since you need 3-2 spades to make, with the ability to count 12 tricks on any spade split. Also, can have a much more compact auction if opener assumes the controls are aces...then the actuion continues 3♥ (♦ ask) - 4♦ (Ace or V) 4♥ (♥ ask) - 5♦ (Ace or V) ?

East opens like a 2.5-3 loser hand 1♣ in 3rd seat and is surprised they missed slam?

3N for me... less likely to get to a club slam perhaps....more likely to survive a ♠ lead against 3NT.

Assume no unusual agreements. Undiscussed if 3 of a new suit here is forcing or not. (Since a cheap cue bid is available, my gut reaction is no.).

no, 2♠. Whoops, no, LHO bid 2♠, and CHO bid 3♦.

Opponents: Very strong, one of the strongest pairs in the state. State of the match: 1st board of 7, final match of the day, you're on the 2nd place team, playing the 3rd place team. 1st place is out of reach (Over 100 VPs after 6/7 matches) V: None ♠AKTx ♥9xxxx ♦- ♣Kxxx LHO opens 2♠, partner bids 3♦, pass to you...

Keycard with this hand is beyond sick, considering that 2 of the 3 keycards partner could have are totally wasted values.

Abstain. I probably would have just bid 5♦ at my first turn. Be more worried about missing slam than anything.

Might want to count how many cashing aces you're off...

What I play with one partner is: Pass = Minimum Show Aces = Unsure wether to blast or not, but not dead minimum. Bid 6N = Max

Doubt it has anything to do with file size, unless something changed on that side in the last year or so. At one point in one partnership I was using a CC with lots of relay sequences defined that was over 1mb.

I wonder how much of it is because IMPs is the defaults and many people will never bother to change it (Or even know how to...) Would be interesting to make it default to MP for a week and see the stats...

Sounds about right to me, although to me partner is only promising the K♦. Wouldn't be shocked if RHO had A♦ and Jxxx of hearts. EDIT: Meant to say that I think 2N opening is clear on this. Closer to 2♣ - ?? - 2NT than 1♥ for me. This hand is why you play puppet.

Swiss Pairs is a really really bad idea. It really doesn't reflect true skill. If you put, say, Meckwell and another ultra-strong pair (Fantunes, say) at the same table, because of the quality of play involved, 'worse' MP results would probably come back than randoms playing, due to the proper defense being found almost all of the time.

Gerben, imagine you were playing a pair with the following methods: Strong Club (Including all 15-17 NT hands) 1♦ - Catchall, could be 10-11 Balanced 1NT - 12-14. Would you really play your strong NT defense against that 1N? My rule personally is that any NT range that includes 15 is strong: So: 10-12/11-14/12-14 - weak 12-15/13-15/13-16 - strong Seems to work well.

Sorry Arend, but you're going to have to grind out the Black/Silver/Red. All of the XXX Life Master ranks require being a plain LM, with all that entails.

But that's kinda the point. If it isn't exactly SAYC, it's just SA. If I sat down with anyone (esp. under the age of 70), and the extent of our agreements to be be 'Standard American', I would expect 1♦-2♥ to be weak, 1m-2N to be 10+ - 12, not 13-15, as two examples.

Absent furthur discussion I'd expect it to be a club control with spade fit and slam interest. e.g. A hand not quite good enough to risk 3N over 3♣, and unsuited for double. Maybe somehting along the lines of: Kxxx x AKxx ATxx or something like that. Another possible interpretation is that it is a 'good raise' to 4. Take the above hand without the A♦, for instance.

A popular system in these parts is: 3♣ - 5/5 Minors Wk 3♦ - 5/5 Minors GF 3♥ - 5/5 Majors Wk 3♠ - 5/5 Majors GF This is an expanded version of what OP described, and I find it very playable. maybe not the best uses for the bids, but playable, and good if you're not ready for more advanced NT gadgetry.

Apple + Click == Right Click

What is the actual partnership AGREEMENT. Is 2♦ actually non-forcing, or did N simply choose to pass. That out of the way, was there damage? If I were EW I would be happy to get 150 on these cards...looks like 110 or 130 at most playing !C, with 2NT probably down. Also, seems to me E might have failed to play bridge, by simply bidding 2♣ with that monster and not doubling after 2♦ - p - p (Or Xing the first time). After N passes 2♦ E certainly should be suspicious.

Playing it as strong makes NO sense at all unless the 2-level response was some sort of weak bid.