skjaeran

Obvious 2♠ rebid to me. Normally this hand will play waaaay better in spades than hearts, eventhough there are exceptions.

Playing transfer responses over 1♣, I can respond 2NT; 13+ balanced.

I guess I'm responder. The hand isn't strong enough to GF vs my minimum openers, so 1♠. Add a queen somewhere, and I'd bid 2♣. If RHO opened, double is obvious.

There's a lot of factors here. If I expect we might end up defending with partner on lead, I'd bid the suit with a top honour, to help partner hit the lead. If I'm pretty sure I'll end up declaring, I tend to chose the suit without the ace as trumps (if that's an option). Normally, that makes it more difficult for opps to get a ruff. If nothing of the above factors in, I'll normally chose the suit with most potential entries to my hand as trumps.

Obvious pass IMO. We want partner to lead the minor he holds an honour, if possible.

I'd have opened 2NT, upgrading this to 21-22. After 1♠-2♦-2NT-3NT I'd cuebid 4♣, promising diamond suppport.

I was at the Olrud Easter Festival last weekend and part of this week. TD in the main pairs and scoring the Swiss Teams, both broadcast at BBO. For the swiss teams on Monday and Tuesday all boards were preduplicated. By one in the organizing staff. (same for all tournaments) We don't share boards between tables. The two tables in the BBO match both had a complete set of boards. For the rest of the matches two caddies changed boards throughout. 26 teams participated. We used Bridgemates. I had some problems, but those had to do with being unfamiliar with the new version of the scoring program (first session) and the scoring program itself (last session).

With (most of) my regulars I'd have responded 2♥ inititally, and rebid 3♥, which is invitational for us. I'd not like to GF with the south hand, so if 2♥ is unconditionally GFing, I'd have to respond 1NT and take it from there. I don't think the hand is suitable for 3♥ over 2♦, thus I agree with 2♥. I don't think 2NT was the right rebid with the north hand. I prefer 3♥, but this is pretty close. Passing 2NT is impossible with the south hand. It's obvious to get to game now, the question is to which game. 3♣ sounds weak to me. So I guess it's got to be 3♥ - that ought to be COG.

Perhaps, but at the cost of requiring the boards to be properly duplicated in specific time periods. I would imagine that most duplicating should go on prior to the event. Just imagine the annoyance of a 15 minute delay in the Just In Time duplicating compared to the problem of a 15 minute delay in boards that were prepared hours ahead of time. Besides, we all deal with playing boards in odd orders and/or playing the same number board multiple times during an ACBL Swiss event. I think it would be far harder to get used to the color coding than to get used to playing 1-16 followed by playing 1-16 again in a barometer pair event. Heck, the board could even be numbered 1-17, 2-18, 3-19, etc. At our annual festival I think we use something like 60,000 boards in total. Half of these are preduplicated. After a session, the boards used go straight back to duplicating. We've got four duplimates running, and normally always duplicate boards two days ahead of when they're scheduled to be played. All events are barometer tournaments. Bridgemates are used all over. We have big screens showing standings and a grid with all the tables - colour coded, so TDs always can look up and see which tables are slow/haven't entered all the scores etc.

Unfortunately, surely they can't (or at least surely they won't), and that's why it will not happen. I have been told by someone who knows that that is a fact. There are other logistical problems as well. For example, after the round, instead of everyone passing the board down 1 table, the caddies/directors have to replace every board in the (very large) room. I've never played in such an event, but isn't it the case that there is generally a complete set of boards at the table and north takes out the appropriate ones for the round to be played? Yes, but I don't understand what you are getting at. If you use barometer in a 13 table section, then instead of needing 26 boards to complete the movement (2 on each of the 13 tables at a time) you need 169 (13 of each board). Further, instead of the boards being on the correct starting table and the players (easily) moving them for each round, someone has to collect all the boards every round and bring a whole new set for the next round. Barometer is definitely better for the players and the game, but it's much more expensive and a huge logistical hassle. Edit: Now I see what you meant, that at least there isn't an extra workload. I don't think that's the case, in my experience they won't give you boards at your table for rounds you aren't currently playing. Rightfully so imo. But someone else may know better, like Harold. On our annual festival, we did give out all the boards for a session at the start. But we had too many instances of players taking the wrong boards that we abandoned this practice. For the last few years we've had caddies changing boards each round.

You really don't play barometer tournaments over there still? I guess we've played barometer only (very few exceptions) for more than 50 years over here. I still remember duplicating by hand in the early 80's myself (for a couple of tournaments I TDed for my club).

Agree that the Indian NBO should change their screen regulations. This case wouldn't be ruled upon in Norway - table result stands.

Agree that the case was well handled by the AC. As a TD I'd have ruled result stands, without asking EW to appeal, since I find this an easy case to rule upon.

The boring 3♥ for me too.

I strongly doubt that!

I'm passing this.

4NT would be KC for hearts in my world, since 4♣ would be forcing. 2NT shows a good hand, a maximum with opener is GF. (You bid 3♣ p/c to stop in openers minor.)

Even a not so young player like me would raise to 4♠ with the east hand.

double, you cant do it. You're clearly a better player than me, so I'll take your word for it.

It's close between passing and 3♦ for me. Playing with myself I'd tend to pass now.... Being a bidder, I'll try 3♦ and follow Mike's route from there.

1♥ for me. The hands strength fits into my weak twos, but not the ♠QJTx. Move that to one of the minors, and I'd open 2♥.

Partner made a responsive double, showing the unbid suits. I've got support for clubs, thus I rebid 3♣.

I think I'll declare. Looks like I can execute an endplay on east, losing a spade, a diamond and two clubs. I haven't looked too closely, though.

Because 4♠ might actually be a winner, in which case you need to protect your score. Huh? We're both passed hands, really looks to me like we're making a save. Though we might have a lot of tricks in spades. I'd expect opps to have 10 or 11 tricks. If they've got 10, we've already done our job by pushing them up a level. If they've got 11, we give ourselves a bottom instead of a 35-45% board by doubling.

I prefer 3♠ over 3♣. Partner is still able to rebid 3NT on some hands, when that's the right spot. After 3♠, reaching 6♣ should be easy.