Rossoneri

I bid 1♠, bidding went pass pass and now RHO comes alive with 2♦! Do you now agree with 2♠? Partner goes on with 3♠ and i just bid game. Misdeclared the game and so I lost 10 imps....This was a set where I lost 20 imps in 2 boards through sheer loss of concentration. (Misdefended the other one)

[hv=d=s&v=e&s=s8632hq87dacq6543]133|100|Scoring: IMP Bidding goes, pass, 1♣, double, pass to you[/hv] Your bid now?

Prof Yang Bo-Yin has his 'Terrorist' variant...

You haven't really solved the problem here. You still have to know whether 4NT is quantitative or a trump cue. So you still have to know if you have agreed a suit or not. Same applies if you want to use Turbo.

Post it :)

Defend the 1♣ like it was a Polish Club. Defend the 1♦ like it was a Precision Diamond Defend the 2 level bids by thinking about dead puppies so you don't laugh hysterically as they end up in some insane contract. Why Polish Club? The 1C opening seems rather different from PC. I wasn't aware of a special defence against Prec 1D.

I think the only option now is to use an external dealer to control the parameters and use a teaching table. Would be nice to have ulven's idea. I for one would foresee myself using it pretty frequently...

Clarifications: 1) These are not "proposed system notes", someone actually played it. Neither do I have any wish to play it. I just find it truly bizarre. 2) Nothing wrong with the comments...pretty good criticism, but suggested D? 3) If you wish to know the full story, PM me.

Ok. Just as I thought. But that's still not the most important point. Suggested defence? Or ideas?

Correct me if I am wrong (since I am nowhere remotely near ACBL-land), but I looked at the GCC and saw: Wouldn't this effectively void the 2♥/♠/NT openings since LHO of opener does not immediately know what suits opener is holding?

The following system was described as "Standard American SIMPLE Variation (aka 1C-Stayman Variation)" 1. Stayman 1C This is a query from the Opener, similar to an NT-Stayman convention. Responder just answers whether he has a 4-card Major or not. The distribution of the Opener’s hand is not really known. Some common distributions for Declarer are : - a) Declarer has a ≥5-card Club, 12-22HCP (re-bids Clubs) b) Declarer has a 4-card Major, 12-22HCP. Should not be a standard NT opening hand. c) Declarer may have 5-card Diamond, 4-card major. 12-22HCP (will re-bid Diamond if no major suit agreement). d) Declarer could even have a 5-4 in Majors, 12-22HCP (voluntarily re-bids a new Major) e) Declarer has a 4-3-3-3 hand and prefers to play in NT. 12-15HCP. f) Declarer has flat-hand, 19-20HCP (re-bids 2NT). 2. 1D Declarer is telling the responder not to bid any 4-card Majors. Responder either answers his 5-card Major, 5-card Minor, or heads for NT. Possible distributions for Declarer are: - a) Both Declarer’s Majors are less than 3-cards. He should have ≥3-card Diamonds. b) Declarer has 5-5 in Majors, 12-15HCP. (5-5 Majors, ≥16HCP are covered under RCO 2H Opening). 3. 1H or 1S Declarer has 5 or more of the bid Major, 12-22HCP. Declarer should not be holding 5-4 in Majors (else will bid 1C). Declarer should not be holding 5-5 in Majors (else will bid 1D or RCO 2H). If declarer re-bids the other Major, it is probably a 6-5 Major distribution, 12-15HCP. (6-5 Distributions with ≥16HCP are covered under the RCO 2H Opening). Proceedings are similar to Standard American. 4. 1NT Declarer has Flat-Hand, 16-18HCP. Proceedings are similar to Standard American. 5. 2C Declarer has one of the following distributions: - a) ≥5-card major, ≥19HCP, ≤4 loser hand. b) ≥23 HCP, no double-suited hand (else will bid RCO bids). 6. Multi-Tiered 2D (aka Multi-2D) Declarer has one of the following distributions: - a) Weak, pre-emptive hand, ≥6-card major. (re-bids Majors) b) Flat-Hand, 21-22HCP (re-bids NT) c) Strong Hand with ≥5-card Minors. ≥9 playing tricks. (re-bids Minors) 7. “Rank-Colour-Others” 2H (aka RCO 2H) RCO bids describe strong 2-suiter hands (≥16HCP). RCO 2H describes 2-suits of the same Rank (Majors or Minors) Responder should relay with 2S. The following are the interpretations to the re-bids: - a) 2NT: 5-5 in Minors, 16-18HCP. b) 3C: 5-5 in Minors, ≥19HCP. c) 3D: 5-5 in Majors, 16-18HCP. d) 3H: 5-5 in Majors, ≥19HCP. 8. RCO 2S Describes Strong hand with 2-suits of the same Colour. Responder should relay with 2NT. Re-bid interpretations as follows: - a) 3C: 5-5 in Black suits, 16-18HCP. b) 3D: 5-5 in Red suits, 16-18HCP. c) 3H: 5-5 in Red suits, ≥19HCP. d) 3S: 5-5 in Black suits, ≥19HCP. 9. RCO 2NT Describes Strong hand with 2-suits not covered by 2H or 2S openings. Responder should relay with 3C. Re-bid interpretations as follows: - a) 3D: 5-5 in Diamonds and Spades, 16-18HCP. b) 3H: 5-5 in Clubs and Hearts, 16-18HCP. c) 3S: 5-5 in Diamond and Spades, ≥19HCP. d) 3NT: 5-5 in Clubs and Hearts, ≥19HCP. 10. 3C, 3D, 3H, or 3S Typical Standard-American 7-carder pre-empt hand. 1) Not that it really matters, but I think this is not GCC Compliant. Going by what I saw in Orange book, I don't think it is legal in EBU territory as well? 2) What would be a good defense to the various artificial bids? Disclaimer: I did not come up with this system. Further Disclaimer: Any resemblance to any person, dead or living is purely coincidental.

No bridgemates in my country yet. NCBO and everywhere else I've been has contract column and tricks column. People usually either just write the contract and number of tricks taken like 4S 11 or they are like me and write 4S+1 11 I have yet to seen "4S+5" though we usually like to say "making five?" at the end of the play.

I tend to agree with the view that the main problem is with the military and not the religion itself. I happened to be in a somewhat similar, but less extreme situation myself, except that my Christian faith was targeted, though to be fair it wasn't really explicit targeting. On a side note, it is sad to see "Christians" acting in such a way, but there are always such people around everywhere, such is the fact of human nature.

Maybe I'll have a shot at playing next year if I can get a team...helps that it's near enough to Warwick which is where I'll be...

Oh dear, how am I going to watch so much Euro action at one go!

Thanks adam :)

[hv=d=n&n=skqjxhkqxdcakjxxx&s=saxhaxxdqjt9xxcxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Playing SAYC, First round control cues.

1♠ isn't that much an issue for me...but responder's bidding was just plain horrible....forgive me for saying this, but the bidding wouldn't be out of place in the beginner's tournament I was helping to officiate on Thursday...

Clearly, a system for the 21st century! One could apply it to situations involving jump bids which can be confused as either cue or splinter as well.

There's still brave sir robin :P

Thanks. I have a two hour slot tomorrow, of which I am also supposed to go through 9 of the 18 boards they played today....(Spent 1 hour duplicating those boards manually, with help from another guy) My original plan was to cover counting + basic leads/signals, but think I will just concentrate on counting. Inquiry's recommended website seems good, will point them there. Ken hit the problem right on, I lost count of how many stranded winners I saw today, and how many times declarer realised they were winners only after the 13th trick.

I'm supposed to teach a bunch of new players this coming weekend. Okay they aren't that new, but it's fair enough to say they've only been in contact with contract bridge for 2 months. I'm touching on leads and signals (Someone else is covering bidding) so I was also thinking of incorporating some counting basics. My idea is to flash 3 numbers on the screen and ask them to take turns one-by-one to give the fourth number which will add up to 13 (e.g. I flash 5-3-4 and the girl/guy has to answer 1), with the aim of them being able to answer instantaneously of course. Any criticism/other suggestions? Thanks.

Don't agree with the given auction, don't think 2S really helps. Partner most probably doesn't have 4 spades, how would bidding 2S help? Marlowe's suggestion seems good.

Yikes! Sounds, feels and looks like one of those crazy bidding misunderstandings that I experienced over the weekend.

My mother had her gall bladder removed a few years back, so "do you have the gall" should be offensive to people like her as well, I guess. On a more serious note, there will be some that will be offended I guess. My personal take is, must it come down to usage of such vocabulary? I trust that everyone should be educated/civilized enough to utilise a better choice of words. Good call Uday.