skjaeran

I'd always get this hand off my chest as a 22-24 NT. I open 2NT in my methods to show that hand, most natural bidders have to bid 2♣...2NT.

That's what I do with my regular partner, even if 1♣ promises 4+. 1NT=natural (15-18) 2♣=natural 2♦=wjo in one major 2M=weak/strong Michaels

I know very well how good and bad a hand partner might hold for a 2♥ overcall. It's quite a wide range. On the worst hands we might go down in 2♥. But I'd invite game here. So 2NT it's got to be. The upside is that we might get to a makeable game and that we might change a losing partscore to a winning partscore. The downside is that we might change a plus to a minus or a minus to a bigger minus. It's close, but I think 2NT will be the longtime winner.

1. Natural GF, 5♥'s and 4♣'s. 2. Natural GF, 5+♣'x and 4♠'s. 3. Shortness (normally singelton), slammish with ♣'s. Normally 3136 or x1x7, could be 2146 or 3046.

1. I don't agree with the 1st pass. I'd have bid 1NT. 2. I'd never be in this situation, but since I didn't plan to defend 1♠x, I must have thought my hand was too weak or flawed for a 1NT bid last time. Thus I'll bid 1NT now, which in that case should show a hand about this strong.

With my regular partner we'd start the bidding 1♦-1♠-3♥. This sequence by opener shows 5+♦'s, 4♠'s and short ♥'s. Our 1♦ opening shows an unbalanced hand with 5+♦'s, unless 4441 with a singleton ♣. I'm aware that most americans would open your example hand 1♦, and thus might reach the grand lacking one trick. Btw, I'd most probably open 1♣ in a standard system with your example hand too. Most Norwegians (far from all) would in fact.

With a passed partner this is a clear pass of 1NT IMO. I'll pass throughout red at IMPs. At MP and some other vulnerability I might act over 3♣.

I overcall 1NT more often than most, but this is an easy pass. If partner could have a hand where we should be in game, he'd have opened, not passed in my style. I'm not afraid of missing a partscore, since partner will often be there balancing if it goes pass-pass. And as Phil pointed out, often one of the sides will end up declaring 1NT, and we'll get a better score defending than declaring every time we score less than 9 tricks.

I agree with the bidding and with leading a diamond. Anything else makes no sense to me at all.

This is the real problem hand here. It's far from clear what will be the winning bid in the long run. Pass, 3NT and 4♥ are all possible. I doubt I'd ever pass at the table, but it might often be the winning bid. I'd try 3NT. Unless opps can run the ♣'s, I think 3NT will make most of the time 4♥ can be made, and also on some hands where 4♥ is unmakeable.

In standard 5cM methods I'd probably pass here, the alternative being 3♦. In my preferred methods, where 1♦ promises an unbalanced hand with 5+♦'s (except when 4=4=4=1), I'd bid 3♦, even if it's still not perfect.

I really hate this position, since there's no way to correct the misbid last time. This really is an obvious 1NT opening IMHO. Now nothing is right, but 2♦ is't got to be. That's the best shot to land on our feet again. 2NT is WAY to much.

2♠, wtp? Switch the minors, and 4♠ might be possible, but I'd still rebid 2♠.

1♥, still unanimous, as it honestly should be.

Add me to the 3♦ bidders. If we've got game, partner will make another move.

Double. Can't make any guess now, just hope partner had ♦'s, which is odds on.

No need to make any guesses at this time. 1♦ and await proceedings.

It's very easy to decide who's the best player in my area (southeastern part of Norway) - ask any player, it's unanimous: Tor Helness (with Erik Sælensminde 2nd). The best part when it comes to Helness (except for his great ability as a player of course) is his ability to explain his reasoning in such a way that intermediates (mostly) can understand it and learn from him. Same for what was my area (middle Norway) before moving to Oslo, and still unanimous: Geir Helgemo (with Terje Aa, Glenn Grøtheim and Ulf Tundal (not very close) behind). Of course, with one World Star in an area, it's very easy to determine, and whatever method used would give the same result.

A little late perhaps since I've been offline for more than a week (family summer vacation), but even easier to vote. :) NORWAY!! Erik Berg - Espen Lindqvist Ivar Berg - Tor Ove Reistad Petter Eide - Allan Livgård A very talented and experienced team.

I don't think I'll be going to Reykjavik this time, and if I do it'll be with my regular partner. I've been to Iceland four times (once playing for Norway in the Nordic Junior Teams Championship) and three times for the Icelandair Open. I recomend the tournament for all interested. Great hospitality, well organized and quite a strong field with several internationals playing. Last time I went there we managed a trip to the Blue Lagoon - outdoor bathing in a natural pool with naturally heated (volcanic) water - quite an experience. We managed a trip one morning before playing bridge, but it's better to spend an extra day in Reykjavik!

I think something much, much stronger than a sledge hammer is needed. Search for AAr's posts here and on rec.games.bridge ... he's been asking this same question basically for 6 years, and getting the same answers for 6 years. I don't know if he's trolling or if he really expects the answers to change all of a sudden despite the IMP table not ever changing & no scoring changes for over a decade. I can see you're right about that. I've only checked here at BBO, and AAr has indeed had several threads asking similar questions...

The same happened in my old club, only this guy had only 13 cards from the start! What happened was that he saved the trump ace. During play he happened to NOT play any card to a trick somewhere in mid-play. Thus, he still held the trump ace when the 13th trick was finished. Law 67 B say that under such circumstanses, the extra card should be "played" to the defective trick (that containing only 3 cards) without affecting the outcome of the trick. So, no trick to the trump ace! B)

The same goes for hand 1. I've got no method to show 3-5-0-6 either. B) Of course the slam is laydown, since you can afford to lose two tricks and still make 12 yourself. :)

Harald, While all you have to say is well and good, and it is great for you, or Helgemo, or (insert your favorite player here) to try for an overtrick at IMP play based on well calculated odds at the table, I still feel that you are missing my (or the) point. A forum user who likely isn't the same caliber player as the ones mentioned asked a question regarding trying for overtricks at IMP. It is NOT in his best interest to be advised regarding what Helgemo might do for whatever reasons or odds in regards to trying for overtricks at IMP/VP play. In his case, he should forget about overtricks, and concentrate on making whatever contract he is in. I seriously doubt Helgemo cares what I have to say on the subject anyway, but my advice isn't intended for him. :) It is addressed to the original poster of the question. Yeah, I appreciate that. And it's probably a good advice for the original poster... And maybe your sledge hammer was needed? B)

What if as soon as they are ungagged their colour changes and they are displayed at the top of the kibitzer list? That doesn't really work either. Since if a commentator is ungagged for one session of a broadcast, (s)he is never gagged after that session. Thus, if kibbitzing a later sessing, (s)he would still be looking like a commentator on top of the list. Of course you could gag commentators after each session, but that would be more work for operators or Roland, who'se got a more than tight enough schedule and enough other things to take care of than gagging commentators.