bid_em_up

south didn't envision north's problem very well, he should cooperate with the slam try by bidding 5♣. after all, south could have held: dealer: ????? vul: ???? scoring: unknown]133|100| ♠ Kx ♥ Jxx ♦ K10xxxx ♣ xx [/hv] Ok, so maybe that's an exaggeration. Still, North has heard the auction and is still making a slam try. South should cooperate and show where his values lie. It is practically impossible for North to be missing the diamond king and the club king, and has a spade loser and still be making a slam try. I would assign 100% to South for failing to cooperate, except North could make South's life easier by cuebidding 4♠ (not 4♥). This cuebid would show a huge hand (which he has) and practically scream "show me the money!!" to South. South then becomes 100% obligated to show the K♣. So......50% to each.

Plop. 1500.

It's BBO forums. Would you expect anything else?

This is true when you agreed to accept Section 8 tenants and are then attempting to evict for non-payment, lease violations, etc. I'm not so sure that it applies in this case, since as the new property owner, he is under no obligation to accept Section 8 tenants. It should be a simple matter of filing the eviction paperwork with the court, and having the tenants served. I agree that they may trash the place in retaliation. However, the best recommendation I can make is that you consult with a good real estate attorney in your area regarding these matters instead of listening to us. ;)

You might want to check on the Section 8 housing regulations. From what you have stated above, the current owner hasn't worried about "rent increases" for many years. However, Section 8 is supposed to make up the difference between what the renter is able to pay and the current fair market rental of the property. I doubt HUD increases this payment automatically, there is likely some paperwork that has to be filed, and the current owner probably hasn't bothered to do so. So if the fair market rental really is $200-$300 higher in that area, it is entirely possible that HUD will make up this difference without actually having to replace the tenant in question, and without substantially increasing the amount the current tenant is paying out of pocket. Another plus to being qualified for Section 8 (and as the landlord you have to apply for and maintain Section 8 qualification), is that you have a constant pool of available renters, so the property is unlikely to sit vacant for very long. Of course, if you think you will be charging rent that exceeds the fair market value, it's an entirely different story.

you gotta be &*()^!! kidding me?!? heh. guess you two better discuss this one, chas. We did. Hopefully, Tyler saw the light when the auction proceeded: (p)-p-(1♥)-X- (2♥)-3♥-(4♥)-6♣- (p)-? and the random BBO expert bid 6♦ at this point, which of course, was promptly doubled. :huh: Tyler then bid either 6N or 7C (I dont remember), again doubled and off one and of course, 6♣ was making all along. :P

You could also send it directly to Arigreen via Forum messages or with a little thought, you could probably figure out his email address.

Not this. But I did think there was one on how many cards partner will have (on average) in a minor suit that he opens. **SAYC plus exactly 4-4-3-2 This might be the one I am thinking of.

Hasn't this been covered already? Or maybe it was in the ACBL bridge bulletin recently, it all kinda runs together these days.

you gotta be &*()^!! kidding me?!?

This looks more like a Jimmy Buffet song than the crap Winston posted above. (Where's the damn salt?) You don't look like Jimmy Buffett, either. :) No, but I do sound a lot like him.

Hawai‘i Has No Beer? :) Jimmy would definitely be singing about that if it were true.

Have you actually seen "Saving Private Ryan"?

This looks more like a Jimmy Buffet song than the crap Winston posted above. (Where's the damn salt?)

I think that if it is our partnership style to open this sort of hand in first seat, then I need to accept when he makes an invite. I have good trump support, Kx is prime opposite a LSGT, and the diamond suit is decent. If our opening standards are normally higher than this and I decided to open anyway, then I will decline the invite. jmoo.

I don't think I would be able to stop laughing long enough to actually make a ruling.

Correction. People from the South call 'em "damnyankees". An old joke goes something along the lines of "I was 12 years old before I knew that "damn yankee" was two words." :D

And all this time, i thought that a negative double followed by a bid only showed invitational values (not GF). Because if I had a GF call with a qualifying suit, I would have bid it directly, instead of screwing around making a negative double. Or in other words, agree with gwnn.

The hand is an obvious misfit and we are minimum. Pass seems clear to me.

lol, oh really? Maybe you want to tell that to "Ruben Enaje, 48, was nailed to the cross in San Pedro Cutud for the 23rd year" along with the video showing him being nailed to a cross by the palms of his hands. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ed5_1239493030&c=1

Why would we give RHO a kitten for this sort of behavior? B)

Very well. Partner bids 3♥, and you bid a "well-placed" 4♦. This was the sequence actually followed at the table, but I was not feeling quite as smug about it as I might have done. For example, might I not bid the same way with: ♠AKxxx ♥xx ♦Qx ♣AKxx? Wouldn't this hand bid 3♣ over 2♦?

Maybe I'm just brain-dead. Can somebody please format the auction properly?

[hv=n=s2hkj10843dj52c642&s=saj108haq965daca107]133|200|nobody vul. South dealer. [/hv] 1♥-(2♠)-4♥-(p) 4♠*-(p)-4N**-(p) 5♦***-(p)-? * Cuebid ** 4N RKC *** 5D 1-4 So....why on earth does the bot pass 5D? :( (i was kibbing this hand @ end of tourny, not playing it)

Do you also understand the laws to say "when the six is exposed first, then retracted and the Queen is played in its place, that in reality the six is the played card"? The play of the six wasn't truly an "accident" as in "uh oh, I dropped two cards on the table exposing both" or "damn, that card just fell out of my hand", but instead the play of facing the six to the table and then, "oh *****, thats the wrong card, I meant to play the Queen" so then the Queen was faced to the table also.... is the way I interpret this. So the six remains the played card. It's not that hard, really.