YesHoney

Have you tried "invisible" log in? You might be able to still register as a sub and yet remain invisible to the rest of the world.

Thx DJNeill. Your explanation totally makes sense.

Normally when I kibbitz all is fine but suddenly it all starts moving super-fast: the cards are dealt, there is no bidding, a contract is displayed and a very fast playing period begins. After that, next deals keep on going like that. It has happened to me manymany times. What is going on?

♠ suit is 3 or more cards. 3♥ is absolute minimum, no help in ♠ and no counteroffer.

2♥ 6-9 2♠ LSGT Strong openings pretty standard No agreement on 3NT.

1♥ 2♥ 2♠ 3♥ 4♦ What could be opener's holding? What is 4♦?

ASSUMING that 6NT was trully unintented: Case 1 Nobody really places "Pass" card on the table but instead the other 3 players assume it's the end of the auction and instantly pick up all bidding cards. Could 6NT still be changed? Case 2 LHO passes and 1S opener, presuming his partner's 6NT is unintended, delays his "Pass" for a bit to give his partner the chance to notice he draw wrong card. Wouldn't that be a no-no? I wouldn't say it's unethical but still feels wrong.

Don't know if it matters at this point: 2♦ bidder and his partner said at the table they discussed both possibilities (DONT and Capp) and agreed on DONT. 2♦ bidder remembered, his partner forgot. Lead was A♠.

Red vs. white 15-17 NT 1NT 2♦ X 2♥ 3♣ p 3NT Down 3 undoubled. 2♦ alerted as Capp (M's), no particular agreement on X. At the end of the hand it is explained that the agreement for 2♦ was ♦ & M. Opener's hand: xx AKx Jxx AKxxx Doubler's hand: J9xxx QT95 x QTx 3NT seems like a gross overbid although the bidder argues that he can picture a couple of hands where 3NT makes. On the other hand it seems true that bidding would be different if he knew real meaning of 2♦. How should TD rule?

North and East can't see bids by the other side until both players behind the "screen" have bid.

English not my language and I'm having a problem with the meaning of "each" in Law 45D, Card Misplayed by Dummy: If dummy places in the played position a card that declarer did not name, the card must be withdrawn if attention is drawn to it before each side has played to the next trick... "each" here means... both? either? neither?

What is the purpose of a law that creates a penalty card if then a player sees it as unethical to play accordingly?

VENEZUELA: Rather small bridge community and I will talk only Open and Ladies Teams. As many other countries out there we have tried several methods. No matter how it is done it is always a problem, fights, ironic talk, insults, etc. Pairs (IMPs) competition has been used for several years now, except last year for Open Team but that's dirtydirty laundry... For the Ladies, last year we took a vote among the players that were going to participate and pairs was decided, again. In my view, since there are so few good pairs, no matter how it is done locally, the teams end up being conformed by the 2 sure pairs and the 3rd position is almost anyone's land. Our NBO charges a little (really not much) to play the trials. And helps a lot with the travelling expenses including the entry fees for both teams. I think that covers the main subject of this thread. That being said, gotta add this thread doesn't lack lots of humour. ------------ FLUFFY: You "look" young and yet you do know about ladies teams... your description is funny but accurate :( Your comment made me laugh. HELENE: Love your comment too. What I've seen in my group is that ladies team members won't stop being "mean" (not the word I would really use) to each other when a man is around because it is sooooo important to tell the whole world that they played great but the others gave away 100000000 IMPs. The more listeners the better. I've been in both, Open and Ladies... Gotta say the only true lady in the ladies team was my partner! Still, would be happy to be a part of it any time.

For some time now I've been wondering why when playing the most important team championships (and why not, pairs too) players have to wait until the match is over to know how they scored. I can't think of many sports where players don't know their scores until the very end of the game. And the ones that come to my mind involve judges deciding how a competitor scored. If players know board per board what their actual score is, they can adjust their style and strategy to the state of the match. Isn't that the way it works in sports? I can also think of a good reason for not knowing in advance. Today's technology makes delivering current scores a no-brainer, so that's not an issue. These thoughts have already been submitted to the WBF but I'd like some feedback from players as well.

Besides stating there has been an erroneous explanation, do they have to give the correct one? In this case not "they" but dummy, the bidder of the problematic 3♥, since declarer has trully forgotten the meaning.

Country: Venezuela. We use WBF laws, no changes. Uncontested bidding, no screens in use. 1NT 2NT* 3♣* 3♥ 3NT 2NT alerted as trfr to ♦ and 3♣ as showing ♦ honor. Before opening lead, leader goes through all bids and asks what 3♥ is. Declarer says he thinks it is checking for ♥ stopper. Leader is certain that is not the meaning but doesn't know the true one. He turns to dummy and asks him about 3♥. Dummy says he doesn't have to explain what his partner obviously forgot. Leader leads ♠Q from QJ9xx, dummy goes down revealing a singleton ♣... which was the per-system meaning of 3♥. At this point TD was called but nothing was changed, hand went on, 3NT making 5, the end. On ♣ lead it's -1 as leader had Kxxx and his partner AQxxx. We cannot know if ♣ would have been picked as lead instead of ♠ on full disclosure by opps. My questions: 1. Was dummy right when he said he doesn't need to reveal their agreement in a suicidal act? 2. If not, what should have been the action taken by TD?

Frequently when you agree to support on 3 cards, you have also a way to find out if 3 or 4 cards and if opener is minimum or maximum within the range of his rebid. If no such agreement exists I will take 1c 1h 2h 3d to be a game try and bid 3h. And after 4d (which denies S and C control) there is an easy 4h bid.

Inquiry... I think there was a mistype in the description of serious 3NT you provided. If opener skips 3S and skips 3NT to bid 4C he is denying BOTH the S cue and serious slam interest. Pls let me know if it is me getting it all wrong.