Strangway

I disagree with the 10,000 hr rule on this one. Bridge squeezes have basic rules that are best learned and understood by reading one of the books people have mentioned. Once you understand the technical theory (rectifying the count, which hand your threats are in, preserving your entry etc.) then the 10,000 hours will be of use.

I am assuming now that Funbridge and BBO are merged there must be plans to replace the antiquated and unsupported GIB with Argine? If I'm correct in this assumption what sort of timeframe are we lookint at? Or maybe there are plans to move F2F bridge onto Funbridge and consolidate the platforms? BBO could also really benefit from the personal and team ladders that are available on Funbridge. It would be great to see a vision statement about these matters as the merger is almost a year old now.

When I get my result email from bot tournaments not all my friends, including my regular partner, are showing up in my results. Specific example is the past weekends NABC practise. Our handles are: Strangway and RJP10

I switched my bot play to Funbridge in response to the massive price increase of the daylong tournaments. There are pros and cons. Argine's cardplay makes GIB look like a beginner but, probably due to its European roots, it does not have a good understanding of the bidding methods familiar to North Americans. Funbridge has an interesting ladder-league (both individual and teams) that I would love to see BBO adopt.

It's gonna be a fun change! Looking forward to using suction over 1nt. Also, looking at using the K-S interchange pretty quickly as well. It will be interesting to see what other stuff we run into!

OKbridge used to run huge fields of Swiss pairs. It was a super-fun and competitive format. It would really be nice if BBO would run at least some of it's event in the swiss format.

Does GIB try to play support x's over 1nt overcalls? I had an auction that was this: 1d(me) p 1h 1nt (sandwich overcall it said) x (me...I could hit spades for sure and maybe clubs and had 18 hcp balanced with 2 hearts) p 2h (no idea why GIB is pulling this X with a balanced 7 hcp and only 4 hearts). Why is GIB rebidding a weak 4-card heart suit with a balanced 7 hcp? Does it think I've made a support X? My X should suggest a desire for penalty (usually with a balanced 18-19 count and limited heart support). Does GIB think it needs 9 hcp to pass or something? Not to mention that pass is somewhat free since the sandwich GIB is going to have to pick a suit anyway. Very weird.

I decided to try the robot individual MP tournaments and they are pretty fun and convenient for time. Here is my question: I played 3d making 4 for 130 and got 17%. Two other players also got 130 (one in diamonds, one in clubs) and received scores of 50% and 82%. Sadly, I was unable to print the screen and I can't seem to find this information online. My recap shows that, of the field I faced, most pairs opened a really heavy 1NT and scored better than me. Why is it that a couple of the players in my section were able to score high% with the exact same contract as me. That probably cost me a couple of places in the standings for the tournament.

I wouldn't bid 6nt in a million years on that 9 count. I would start with puppet to uncover a possible 8 card spade fit. If partner bid 3nt I don't think this is even good enough to invite with 4nt. A 6th diamond would be more interesting.

On the auction 1h 1s 2c you would clearly show a 2 suiter by starting with 2d (4th suit forcing) and rebidding diamonds (assuming partner does not raise which is coneivable). (also assumes GF...though i think even with 1rnd force the sequence described would probably be forcing). Since diamonds are shown with 4th suit and then a diamond bit...3d must be a splinter. Walsh is a 1 lvl convention and has no reference to this sequence.

I play regularly on BBO as Strangway with a lot of different partners but I'm having trouble finding people that play a lot of the conventions that I would like to practise such as: Bart, cheap keycard, 2 suit keycard, 2way new minor forcing, meckstroth adjunct, unusual vs. unusual etc. etc. I live in Grande Prairie, AB and have been playing competitive duplicate bridge for over 20 years. I played OK before the graphical interface! I would be particularly interested if someone responded who lives somwhere near me. Cheers, Kevin Strangway

Good point right out of Hardy's 2/1 book suggesting 1d/3c is invitational and 1d/2c is gameforcing. But also in Hardy's book aren't reverses off in a gameforcing 2/1 sequence and just show pattern? Presumably over the 3H bid (yes it shows 4+), whether the 2H bid showed extras or not, 3nt is available as "serious".

Good point Dank. I noticed someone mention an inverted minor showing 5+ card support. Obviously to jump to 3 weak it should be 5+ but for bidding the 2 level 4 card support should be fairly common, moreso at imps where safety if more important than being in notrump.

This is routine: 1S 2c 2H 3c 3d(waiting, 4th suit) 3nt or 3S (either could work out better)(3S is probably the better bid since you need help to run clubs in 3nt). This responding hand is an abolute gameforce...why distort with 1nt when you have an 8 card suit.

Opps, if partner jumps to 5d you must assume he or she does not have an ace i think and pass.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned a 3S call. Now you can see if partner is going to qbid 4c (probably). After a 3S slam try, and a 4C qbid, 4d has absolutely got to be rkc. If partner does not make a qbid but jumps to 5d to show extras, you probably settle for bidding 6d. If partner bids 4d over the 3s call (non-forcing), it is a decision to try for slam with a 4H Qbid, or just raising to 5d. I'd probably Q the heart myself...now it's a question of whether this 4H bid is rkc or not...after a signoff attempt by partner, I would say better to play it as a Q bid looking for the spade control. Another question is whether partner must qbid 4c with a minimum over the 3s Q.

I'm a bit concerned that stratifiying the acbl games will bring in more new players and dilute and already fairly weak field. Will there perhaps be stratiflighting in the future?

3D. Likely to have a play and unlikely to get doubled. 2H looks like it will have too good a play to leave. I don't think 3D will go down 2 with enough frequency to pass.

5D...probably down 1 losing 3 clubs. I would probably x 5S at mp's and expect to set it 1.

Nice to hear the discussion. I found a reference in my library at last: Modern Bridge Conventions (by Root and Pavlicek) says splinter in their "extended splinters" section. I have noted the comment regarding Lawrence suggesting that this is an agreement that should be discussed. I think splinter is better than 55 since it falls with the general rule of "unneccesary jumps are splinter" so it is easier to remember. With 55 just bid hearts and bid them again...there is always "serious 3nt" to catch up on values, or just blast to rkc or a slam. Yes: 2H is 100% forcing in either 2/1 or sayc and I don't know why anybody would think differently. In sayc partners' 2/1 response PROMISES another bid. With an expert partner and no discussion my feeling would be splinter. With a strong 55 partner should not take a chance on a misinterpretation of 3H.

This came up today and I thought my understanding of the uncontested 2/1 auction: 1S 2D 3H was absolutely standard as a splinter in support of diamonds. I tried to look it up and had a heck of a time finding it?!? I informally polled a few friends and got a split decision. What is eveyone else's opinion? Can anyone give me a few references to check out?