hirowla

No matter how many tournaments I play, my completion rate stays as "Unknown". I have mainly played the automated ones but I wouldn't have thought it would matter. This has been the case for months, yet no percentage. I have been playing tournaments over those months - not masses of them, probably 1-2 a week on average. It matter mainly because I want to play the TCR80 tournaments and because I don't have a percentage it rejects me. Any ideas what I can do to get a valid percentage? Thanks, Ian

Thanks for all your replies. I guess reading laws and looking at other hands having these situations is no match for actually going through the experience! At least it didn't happen at a Red point event or a congress, where people get decidedly unfriendly when these things happen. Mind you, I wouldn't be directing them then! So I think a reasonable summary for a quick way to deal with these things (assuming that I'm playing) is as follows: Check whether there was a hesitation. If in doubt (especially if I'm involved), assume that there was one. Work out whether the hesitator's had some reasonable alternative choices to their bid. Check whether the hesitation suggests one of those choices over another. If I'm playing, don't take the suggested action! For others, if they chose that action see whether the opponents were damaged by that choice - if they have been, adjust the score. I'll certainly be more aware of it in the future, and be more careful when I'm involved in things like this. I don't play for money so there's little at stake. Thanks again, Ian

Yeah, I think if I'd bid earlier it wouldn't have been an issue. I think vulnerability was favourable so that should have encouraged me. I thought about bidding 3♣ at the time but chickened out because of the hand's overall weakness. Guess I wouldn't have got into that situation had I bid. BTW, I would have landed in a ♣ contract anyway - partner had a singleton ♠. They do say bridge is a bidder's game :rolleyes:

Yes it was a Howell movement, so there weren't any other directors present.

Hi, Given this seems to be an area of some controversy in rulings, I'd like suggestions on how I should approach rulings regarding break in tempo. In particular, the things that need to be considered and what to do once I have that information. Please keep in mind the following information: This is in a club game, so we're not playing for high stakes. I am a new director and not exactly a veteran of bridge in general. When directing, I am usually a playing director. On this night, there were no other directors available (the other one was at the table!) My opponents are excellent veteran players, among the best at the club. I'll illustrate this with an example, at which I was playing - which of course made it more challenging. I was sitting West, with ♠ 10xxxx ♥ x ♦ - ♣ KJxxxxx. North opens the bidding at it goes: (1♦) - P - (1♥) - P - (2♥) - P* - (P) - X - (P) - 2NT (asking for a minor) - (3♥) - 4♣ - (4♥) - P - P - P. 4♥ goes down 2 tricks, 5♣ makes. The * bid is the issue at stake. The opposition at the end mentioned that my partner hesitated and hence ethically I should have passed 2♥. I didn't notice the hesitation, as my partner is quite methodical. If he paused, I didn't notice it and I generally try to pre-plan my bids to avoid situations like this. In our agreements, an auction like this (without his pause) means the basic requirements for me to bid are 13 cards and a heartbeat! So I had already predetermined if my opponent passed 2♥ I was always going to bid something. So in essence given the above situation: What should happen if the hesitation is not agreed on? My partner didn't think he hesitated either. Was I right in saying when asked to decide that I'd look at the score later to see if anything unusual happened here and I would consider adjusting it if our result was unusual? (As an aside, they didn't pursue it because they got a good score). What things should I be trying to determine in order to decide whether the score needed to be corrected later? Given my partner and I had an agreement (non-written), is it proper for me to bid (as distinct from the suggestion I should have passed)? Is there no logical alternative given we do have an agreement on this, and hence bidding is "required"? Would bidding on to 4♥ with a hand passed in at 2♥ be considered reckless or irrational? I can accept the 3♥ bid as simply competing but the 4♥ bid seems to be having a bet both ways! But his bridge judgment is probably a lot more experienced than mine. Is there anything else to consider from this? Any advice would be helpful. I'm mainly asking in order to learn, nothing more. Thanks, Ian P.S For bonus points, you can tell me how to bid that hand. I'm still not sure what the right thing to do is!

I know this is probably an old topic, but what would you open when you have a 2-3-4-4 or 3-2-4-4 distribution? Let's assume that you have 12-14 HCP and you play a strong NT. If you had 15-17 pts I'd open 1NT, 20-21 2NT, 18-19 it doesn't matter as much as you're going to rebid 2NT anyway. I've heard reasons both for opening 1♣ and 1♦. What I'm after are the reasons for choosing each. I know SAYC recommends 1♦ but I'm not sure why. So, could everybody give a reason for each and give what they would decide? The reasons are more important than the decision though. Thanks, Ian

Maybe a "lower" view, based on what I've seen here. I have no problem with North passing - although that shape is the only 12 point hand I'd ever pass! I'm not a fan of off-shape 1NT openings - but maybe I don't understand why you would do it. My instinct when I saw the hands was a 3♣ rebid was needed. Just because partner didn't open doesn't mean a game isn't on - partner has 6-11 points by passing originally then responding, all you need for game is to be at the upper end of the range. I guess I wouldn't consider a 2NT rebid for the same reason as not opening 1NT (also 2NT promises more points). After a 3♣ rebid, 3NT seems obvious rather than go after 5♣.

I'm no expert I can tell you! But I am interested in the answers too...

1. My partner would get confused and pass! Not sure what I'd do. 2. Based on what I've seen here - with 2 trumps or 3 bad ones, pass or bid 6NT depending on maximum/minimum. With 3 good trumps or 4, 5♥ or 6♥ depending if minimum/maximum. 3. I gather it's a Texas transfer. I'd take it as a control bid in ♠ then decide depending on my hand. 4. I'd take that as a Texas, asking for aces. The last two assumed I'm playing Texas. My partner wouldn't bid those so I'm safe given I don't! I also don't play Kickback - I'll have to look that one up!

I suppose one distinction I want to make is what to do with 6-9 points and 3-4 trumps. If I have 0-5 points with 4 I jump straight to 3 in competition, pass if not. But if I have 6-9 and 4 trumps it feels wrong to jump to 3 in competition - then my 3 bid means 0-9 points with 4 trumps, and that wide range feels wrong. Partner has no idea of my strength then. But one option I thought of (raising to 2, bidding 3 if I have the chance) loses its pre-emptive value - also partner doesn't know if I have 3 or 4 trumps in response. Does that clarify my dilemma? Thanks, Ian

I have some good ideas now - thanks for your suggestions. I am partly trying to cope with a more beginner-like partner and her memory of things. One thing we have never spoken about is the 1NT-3♥/♠ bid, or the bidding another suit after a transfer and what that means. So I think we can get away without using Texas, if we use 3♥/♠ as a slam invite (so we can set trumps) and just bidding another suit over the transfer if I only have 5 cards in the suit. I guess for memory purposes, if we use Texas then we should define what 3♥/♠ mean - which is more memory work! Also I think SAYC has that meaning so I can use it when playing online. Thanks, Ian

I'm from Australia. While I've heard of many conventions, the only time I've heard of Texas has been online. Trying to convince a partner to use it when I've seen limited reasons for using it is hard. This is the only sequence where I can see some use for it (and I'm still not convinced). So is bidding another suit after a transfer a game force, which forces the NT bidder to choose the transferred suit with 3 in support, support the new suit as a secondary choice (4-card support) or bid NT without support for either suit? Of course there is the possibility of not having the 2nd suit, but sometimes we need to lie a little sometimes! So a 4NT bid after a transfer sequence is a quantitative raise in NT, but if you bit another suit (and presumably go back to the transferred suit) then bid 4NT it would be considered as Blackwood? Or would Gerber be understood (obviously it is a jump bid which is one main criteria for it)? Of course that doesn't help unless you know the trump suit (which means you have a 6-card suit).

Just wondered how people deal with Jacoby transfers and asking for aces (Blackwood/Gerber). My question is a sequence like 1NT -> 2♥ -> 2♠ -> 4NT. What does this mean? Is it Blackwood, or a raise of NT? As far as I can tell it could be either. How do I handle wanting to ask for aces, but not necessarily knowing whether my partner has 2 trumps in support or more (I might only have 5 myself)? What if I need to know which before asking for Aces (I might have extra distribution for a suit contract, but only want to be in a NT game). Is Gerber an option to use in some of these situations? Are there any other tricky situations in this context worth knowing about? If it matters, I do not play Texas transfers so that is not an option (I'm not American, which seems to be the main place they are played). Thanks, Ian

I have another small number of sequences (ones I forgot about originally) that some suggestions would be useful. I know some of them are obvious, but it's the subtle ones I'm not sure of. Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 0-5 points Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 0-5 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 0-5 points, a singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 0-5 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 0-5 points, a singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 6-9 points Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 6-9 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 6-9 points, a singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 6-9 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♠ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 6-9 points, a singleton/void Also, same as above except the opposition bid 2♦ or 2♥ rather than double. Not sure if there is a difference, but just in case! Thanks, Ian

I have another small number of sequences (ones I forgot about originally) that some suggestions would be useful. I know some of them are obvious, but it's the subtle ones I'm not sure of. Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 0-5 points Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 0-5 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 0-5 points, a singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 0-5 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 0-5 points, a singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 6-9 points Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 6-9 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 6-9 points, a singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 6-9 points, no singleton/void Partner opens 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 5 card trump support and 6-9 points, a singleton/void Also, same as above except the opposition bid 2♦ rather than double. Not sure if there is a difference, but just in case! Thanks, Ian

I guess I don't play strictly SAYC, but I did want to know what it suggested. The SAYC statement is quite obvious. My problem is that I play a limit raise as promising 4 card support - that's why the distinction is important. So I guess I have a choice of risking a 5-2 fit or risking a 2NT bid with one suit wide open. Are there any other reasonably "standard" options to choose from? Thanks, Ian

Ok, I can understand some of the reasoning now. The only query is what happens if you only have invitational points, 2♥ support and a ♣ suit that is wide open as far as you're concerned? Is it recommended that you ignore the ♣ gap and just bid 2NT, or do something else? As a defender to a 2NT contract, I know what suit I'd be leading! Or is this something you simply take a chance on and blame partner for not having the suit stopped? :D In terms of the 4♥ bid and what it could mean, I guess the principle of fast arrival could be used (not interested in a slam, just the game).

I've seen a particular sequence as forcing or showing support and I'm wondering why. I'm using SAYC as the bidding system. The comparison is with the following sequence - no competition in the bidding: 1♥ - 1♠ 2♦ - 2♥ I see this sequence as a weak preference for ♥, showing 2 in support - if he had 3, he would have bid 2♥ first up (6-9), 3♥ (10-12) or 4♥ (13-15) instead of that bid. In terms of points, less than opening points (otherwise you could use 4th suit forcing) and no guaranteed stop in the unbid suit. As a side question, what would you do if you had an invitational strength hand and no stop in the unbid suit? The sequence I was thinking about is the following: 1♥ - 2♣ 2♦ - ???? Obviously the responder is stronger in points. My question is what does 2♥, 3♥ and 4♥ mean here? I would have taken the meanings to be the same except for the point count. But articles I've read recently seem to hint that 2♥ shows an invitational raise, 3♥ is a game force raise and I've forgotten what 4♥ means. It doesn't seem right to me, because you lose the option to show a preference in ♥ when NT might not be an option. Am I missing something here? Is there some length implied by this sequence that isn't in the 1st one? How do you avoid 5-2 fits if you take the stronger sequence? Thanks, Ian

Interesting to see the responses. The actual action: 1♥ 1♠ 2♦ 3♣ (4th suit forcing) 3NT 4NT (asking if he had more than a minimum, not Blackwood) 5♥ (Thought I meant Blackwood) 5NT (Hoping he might work it out) 6♦ (Obviously didn't) 6NT I just got concerned that we were off top 2 in ♥ and it would have killed us. Not sure how I could have easily found that out. I wanted NT. Just checking what I should have done and whether my sequence was sane, even if not perfect!

I'll tell you where I ended up later, but here are the hands (North opens the bidding): [hv=d=n&v=b&n=s4hq7643dak106caj8&s=sakqj106h5d95ckq104]133|200|Scoring: IMPS[/hv] Both of us playing SAYC, just a pickup partner. We got a good result, but that might have been good luck rather than good management! Thanks, Ian

I think you'll see a theme to these, but I want to fill in the gaps in these situations and would appreciate some suggestions. The system I play is Standard so something that could be understood within that (I'm not going to change to 2/1 or a forcing NT). Partner opens 1♥ - P -, I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens 1♥ - P - , I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - X - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 2♣ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 2♣ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♣ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 6-9 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♣ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 6-9 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♣ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♣ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♣ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 13-15 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♣ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 13-15 support points (these might not make any difference, but I'll ask anyway) Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♦ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Partner opens: 1♥ - 3♦ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - P - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - P - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 2♥ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 6-9 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 6-9 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 10-12 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - <my bid> I have 3 card trump support and 13-15 support points Opponents open: 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - <my bid> I have 4 card trump support and 13-15 support points I think some of these things are similar but they may contain subtle differences - I guess that's the main thing I'm asking. Any ideas? Thanks, Ian

It actually does work - it just isn't obvious! Thanks.

I want to load up some pre-dealt hands into a table (in the Main Bridge Club), and have people play them (well, my partner to play them anyway!). But while it seems that the ability is there to do it, I don't get an opportunity to actually choose MY hands (seemingly I have to choose Jacoby 2NT and 1 or 2 others). How do I load up my own hands into a table and play them? Thanks, Ian