zenko

OK so let say that K of clubs is doubleton, you will end up on the table in this 3-card ending: on the table Jx spades and high heart (or high club depending what do you cash first) and in your hand Ax of spades and 10 of diamonds, whatever you pitch from your hand on trick 11, West pitches the same behind you, that does not seem to work. hint - winning line does not depend on K of clubs being doubleton

You are on the table running your winners, how do you plan to criss, or more precisely to cross back to your hand, if you have no entry West can not feel any pressure

a) do you really think W would lead vs 7 NT 10 form K109xx? :) if club king is doubleton, it is still only 12 tricks 2spades+4hearts+2diamonds+4clubs

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sj74hakqjdaqcaqj6&s=saq5h853d10753c1042]133|200|Scoring: MP 1♣(16+)-p-1♦(0-8)-1♠-2♠-p-3NT-p-4♣(Gerber)-p-4♥-p-7NT![/hv] 10 of spades lead Can you back up partner's supreme confidence in your declarer skills?

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sqj1083hk10dj9765cj]133|100|Scoring: MP RHO (dealer) opens 1 ♣, and the bidding by opponets goes 1 ♣ - 1 ♥ - 2 ♣ - 3 ♣ - Pass, so you probably wrongly passed twice before, will you act now?[/hv]

QUOTE (jdonn @ Nov 13 2008, 11:41 AM) Isn't partner typically a 5143 18 or so as his minimum? The way I see it there are a few potential issues with this slam that are not easy to address, a) If partner does not have AKQ of spades (say AK10xxx(x) is quite possible holding) we are likely lose at least 1 trump trick :rolleyes: If partner has xx (which is possible in these circumstances) in hearts ,he likely has no way to get rid of it c) It seems likley that minors will produce one losing trick Overall I think it is pretty close between inviting slam or going for it, thx to fourth heart that I have. If I have say AQx, then I think the dilemma would be between passing and inviting (I think I would invite then , but I fine with passing too)

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sjxhaqxxdkxxcqxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP pass-pass-LHO opens 3 ♥ -dbl-pass-3 NT-pass-4 ♠-pass-?[/hv]

Hi, Does enybody know how to watch vugraph from Shangai on ourgame.com? My Chinese is bit rusty... Thx, Daniel

OK, this has to be a bug, I played MBT and the bidding goes: 2Cl (STR) by LHO GIB, 3 Sp (Pree) by my GIB partner, 4 Sp (with singleton) by RHO GIB, and LHO GIB passed with xxx in spades?? I expect my GIB partner to be confused with my bidding (frankly, most of my human partners are too), but to see GIB-GIB partnership not to understand each another is quite strange, almost human... Zenko

I just tried it and I like it very much but I can see why a lot of players would not. I have two easy proposals: a) make human declare (rotate hands of course), :) let me claim 0 tricks, i.e. let me give up rest of the tricks, it would speed up the play a lot on blah hands Zenko

I live in MD so playing for real money is not an option, but I would like to try no-money tourney just for fun. Is there a way to do it? Zenko

Yes we ended up in 4 H not in 4 S, and opponent complained that he would NOT lead clubs if there was alert. Sorry for this confusion, in any case I do not think it makes much difference, either way calling director feels wrong to me. Nevertheless I have sneaking suspicion that, how the rules are written right now, he might had valid complaint. I.e., I can not find anywhere in BBO alert/systems guidelines where it says specifically that is allowed to make systemic (non-psyche)bid on 3 card suit without alert. Therefore the same rule might apply as for say, 1 M response on Blue Club 1 D opening which systematically promises 3+ cards. I am not sure that "everybody knows" argument is worth much in this case, my opponent was obviously inexperienced player, to whom concept of 2 clubs bid being "natural" and non-alertabe even on 3 card-suit probably sounds preposterous. And I do think that rules should be written in a way that they cater even for players who can not wrap their minds around such obvious concepts. Judging form somebody else's post, it seems that British Bridge Federation understood that need. Zenko

It is a bit of as paradox, but if it is really the case that 2 C bid is the only option (which I tend to agree), that may actually work in favor of the actual ruling, i.e. if 2 C on 3 cards is "systemic bid" then it should be alerted because it does not necessarily show club "suit". In another words, if I claimed to director "I psyched 2 C bid" it would be OK not to alert, but since I did not, does that imply I should have alerted it? The real question is how much difference makes the fact that this is very common approach, used in a lot of standard-based systems? Zenko

I had interesting case where I got ave- for failure to alert, here is the hand: http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/hands...&username=zenko Our only agreement was basic sayc, so I had a problem what to respond on my partner's 1 spade opener with 762, Q832, K103, AK6. I choose 2 clubs as least of evils and we ended up in 4 spades. Opponent called director claiming that if I alerted 2 cl he would lead club and get one more trick, and the verdict was that I deserve ave- for not alerting. My initial opinion was that the ruling was wrong since we have no special agreement regarding 2 cl bid (4 more pairs bid the same way, nobody called director on them). i.e. that if I choose to "psyche" 2 clubs response I have every right to do it. But the problem is that in sayc 2 club IS systemic bid with this hand, (for 2 h I need 5th h, for 2 nt 4th sp, for 3 nt I have one spade too many), therefore maybe you can make case that it should be alerted as possibly 3 cards with hand unsuitable for any other action. On the other hand, counter-argument can be that bidding 2 clubs on 3-card suit in this situation is "natural" action, not specific just for sayc. I checked ACBL rules and there is no mention about this... any opinions? Zenko

I had interesting case where I got ave- for failure to alert, here is the hand: http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/hands...&username=zenko Our only agreement was basic sayc, so I had a problem what to respond on my partner's 1 spade opener with 762, Q832, K103, AK6. I choose 2 clubs as least of evils and we ended up in 4 spades. Opponent called director claiming that if I alerted 2 cl he would lead club and get one more trick, and the verdict was that I deserve ave- for not alerting. My initial opinion was that the ruling was wrong since we have no special agreement regarding 2 cl bid (4 more pairs bid the same way, nobody called director on them). i.e. that if I choose to "psyche" 2 clubs response I have every right to do it. But the problem is that in sayc 2 club IS systemic bid with this hand, (for 2 h I need 5th h, for 2 nt 4th sp, for 3 nt I have one spade too many), therefore maybe you can make case that it should be alerted as possibly 3 cards with hand unsuitable for any other action. On the other hand, counter-argument can be that bidding 2 clubs on 3-card suit in this situation is "natural" action, not specific just for sayc. I checked ACBL rules and there is no mention about this... any opinions? Zenko