bluecalm

Maybe it would be useful to email Richard Pavlicek so he could run something along the lines of "preempt with 6carder at one table, pass at the other" on his database. He did similar studies already, link to one: http://www.rpbridge.net/9x13.htm

Basically I played you for 2551. My play also relied on defensive error from W (club ruff available but not given). That and you passing with Ax xxxxx xxxxx x over 2S is rather unlikely parlay :)

Was fun to play. I took the last place and I am hoping to do better next time :) The hand Inquiry posted is nice. While I am not happy at all with my line he surely took full advantage of it, very nice play :)

While constructive bidding is easy to learn/practice as there is tons of resources + bbo bidding room it's not so easy with competitive situations. I am thinking that maybe having list of problematic situations would help (so for example players could answer separately and then compare the results). Any ideas where I could find some suitable tests like that ?

North 100% It's clear after 2d that declarer is 1534. If it was x AKJxx Axx Kxxx declarer would be claming. If it's x AKJxx AJx xxxx inserting Qd doesn't hurt. If it's x AKJxx Jxx KT85/KJ8x we need to hop with Qd Tbh I fail to see any problem in this hand. I understand that S didn't signal Ad more carefully. Those high trump spots are sometimes useful and I don't expect partner always using them to signal. Maybe they could in this hand but as a rule I prefer them not throwing T/9 of trumps around and err on the safe side when signalling.

Old debate. Imo the best and easiest style are weak reverses (most 15hcp and all 16+) with 2S/3 in partner's suit as NF and other bids 8+GF. This is also very popular in top level bridge. You can even put 16-21 single suited hands in reverse playing that way (clarifying after 2N isn't much of a problem) as top Italian pairs do. Strong reverses mean systemic offshape 1NT and very wide ranging 1m-1M-2m sequences. All that to use quite low bid for very rare hands. Imo it's just a bad idea.

Yeah but that means opening 1C with 5D332's 12-14 and also 1453 still lacks a rebid after 1S. Some people are doing it here but it's not very popular.

Strong diamond hands are a problem in Polish Club, especially after 1C - 1D. That's the reason some polish club pairs here play 1D as 11-21 but that comes with its own set of problems. Anyway, now assuming 3D bidder is 18-21 unbal with 6-7 diamonds (without 4M as that could bid 1M instead of 3D) and bid 4H with support and 3N without after 3H, passing is a big blunder (1.88imp/hand double dummy). I realize those assumptions aren't exactly representing 3D range (some of those hands bid 2D, some probably 2N) but I think it's still worth something. I tried eliminating hands with stiff A/K/Q and making it 18-19 instead of 18-21. 3H is even bigger winner then.

I think it's spot on. Additional point is that if you play what Meckwell play then it's easier to solve problems which you encounter especially in competitive bidding. You can just copy what Meckwell do and start from there. There are many people who know the system quite well and will able to help you with any questions. If you go for some elusive structure then you are on your own in every new situation. So I say go for 14-16NT, 11-13 1D promising 2+ diamonds, 2C as 6+, 2D as D shortness: (43)15/4414/4405. 1M openers disciplined (as far as precision goes, so no 10 counts unlles exceptional) and 2/1 strictly GF. I think the system is very sound, 2C as 6+ is way better then 5+. 2D opening is very descriptive and 1D easier to play when it promises 2.

Tbh it sounds like weekend project for remotely competent programmer. Maybe two weekends if some interface is needed. Or you know, you can call Polish TD's.. we have full history for every pair, scores +live scores if TD enables them from every tournament played (even most local tournaments) the second after the tournament is over. We usually play 50bds tournaments divided into 5 sessions. Of course the full histories/scores are online right after every session ends.

As to the hand I would double. I don't think they make often enough and I want partner to act with stuff like 0-4-4-5 which he often won't without the double.

I have 122 such hands. In 72 of them there was a pass after 4S. Remaining 50 are here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/y3dktdmz9l1j4ki/1SX4Snppart0.lin

Doping is not fair comparison to what they did. While doping is against the rules and give you advantage it doesn't kill the game right away, especially in games like football where there are 11 players from one team on the pitch. THis is more similar to bribing the arbiter to give you several penalties or knocking players from opposing team down when the arbiter is not looking. Maybe putting electronic device in a ball which makes it miss the goalposts would be in similar category. What they did is offence against very essence of the game. It's basically the same as playing boards you already know and managed to smuggle as official boards. In bridge information is everythign. If am allowed to have a few illegal signals here and there I would be the best player in the world by long mile. In tennis if I am allowed to use w/e PED' there are I will maybe beat some people I usually lose to and that's it.

My point is that there is no way that WBF or any other international body police all the 200 (or w/e the number is) local federations. The only sane solution is to make federations responsible for sending teams which play according to the rules and take the consequences if they don't. It put incentives in the right place as well: it's not profitable to turn a blind eye on cheating either as a federation or as other pairs in the team. If there is no responsibility on other pairs they won't act. Acting/whistle blowing is often social suicide and you fight the uphill battle against often well established players with basically nothing to win. It won't happen if incentives (you lose medals/right to compete) aren't there. If on the other hand the federation faces say one year ban for incidents that blatant people are going to have incentives in place to keep the team clean. And let's be honest, if you play hundreds of boards with someone in one team you have to be really negligent to not notice something fishy when your partners regularly make magical leads/bids.

Maybe a pass ?