bluecalm

Yeah JL, get a sub.

Standard expert practice is that 4♦ denies ♣ control. If you once denied control in given suit then 5♥ doesn't mean you magically found it... If you play first round control cuebid first then I am sorry but that belongs to previous century. This is all assuming 4♦ is cuebid. If that's help suit try or something obviously ♣ is possible.

I am not approving yelling or even blaming during play but your question doesn't make sense here. Obviously she was furious because in her mind you broke partnership discipline and her normal action wasn't successful because of it. It's of course possible that there are hands when you could open 2♥ and they would still make but that wasn't likely assuming you had your bid (in her mind). In my mind asking this question is contributing to bad atmosphere and argument. While you didn't yell or anything you displayed aggressive behavior towards her in my opinion. Also note that her answer is perfectly logical. You would get the very same answer in normal discussion after the hand (assuming partner don't yell but just say he/she is unhappy about your action).

In my preferred style it's a pass. I like weak twos to be just weak openings 7-10hcp and not "small preempts". i don't mind not opening at all. Fantoni and Nunes don't use weak twos at all and are very conservative when it comes to 3 level openings (as all Italians are) and they don't seem to suffer too much because of it... If I am forced to open I choose 3♥. I don't approve a style when I open 2♥ with: AQxxxx Kxx xx xx as well as with this hand.

If you play standard without much gadgetry you can be in trouble after 1♦ opening lacking good rebid after 1M response so I can understand opening 1NT.

We have this problem for a long time. I tried to find some at least decent partnerships to play against on bbo and I failed every time. When I posted here looking for partnerships for training matches nobody responded. What is left is to play with people we already know live. It would be really great if there was a place when you can go to play against pairs which have experience together and are decent+ by live tournament standards. I don't know how to solve that. Maybe some kind of club when you verify your name/bridge experience first. Not sure if there is any interest though.

+1, I play the same way. It's for sure not standard though :D

1♥ pass 1NT pass pass dbl = ? I usually want to play t/o doubles everywhere but here I see the case for penalty one according to general principle that we try to bid on first opportunity and avoid balancing later. Anyway, what is your choice and why ?

No idea about standard but I would play that if responder double wasn't negative ie. doesn't show anything about shape then opener's double is takeout. If responder's double is negative then opener's double is penalty according to general principle that if we make t/o double suggesting some suits (here negative double suggesting spades) and then they bid that suit the double is penalty.

I think playing obvious shift and suit preference is basically the same. You just use different cards to show the same things.

Whatever method you choose you should be able to show A or K in clubs. We use suit preference. Some people use obvious shift. The difference is that playing suit preference you have an option of dropping middle card which you should be very careful with though. It's better to signal the suit which isn't the most important than drop a card which can be misread.

Fred, but why did you play the lowest spade anyway ? It seems that vugraph commentators were sure that you are showing K♣. I would think that too playing with regular pd.

♥ or ♦. I think most people would lead ♥ but I believe the way to set most contracts is to open our suits before declare can engineer either discards or endplay. Also my partners would except me to lead minor suit on this auction if I have "safe" holding so they will tend to place some minor suit honours in my hand after seeing ♥ lead. I am going with ♦ but I think it's very close. I don't think tricks like leading Q♠ works against serious players :(

KQ3 AQ972 AT2 K5 it's matchpoints with only our side vulnerable; they deal and open; (3♣) - ? Your choice ? If you choose dbl state your plan after common responses. If you choose 3♥ or 3NT please say why. Would it be different at IMPs ? I had this hand today and i am not happy about my bidding.

Now I am rooting for Diamond to qualify for BB. Nickell team seems like they are out of shape recently so there definitely is a chance. Go Fred and rest :(

I am afraid of them running to 5m if anything, not sure if that is at all likely though.

I pass. Even if somehow 4♠ is normal contract I doubt people will be doubling it so we should have decent board in that case. In case 4♠ is not a normal contract we should get a top anyway and double may convince them to run away.

Clear direct 3♣ for me. Now it's difficult. I think bidding 2NT and then 3NT should show GF hand with 4 of other major (here hearts) and stopper in their suit; at least that would be the case if we are not passed hand. I've never bothered to change the agreements for passed hand. Anyway, 5♣ now seems right assuming partner is not crazy when it comes to reopening. If I know he reopens light I would go with 4♣ feeling it's slight underbid (we could have had: xxxx x A QJTxxxx for that for example).

Seems about right but I would change "5card suit" to "good spots". It seems 5 card suit are overrated at least my experience with simulations tells me so. Dunno how it work in real world :)

I think passing 3♥ is terrible as partner is supposed to be 6-5 for his jump to 3♥ playing precision. I mean what kind of hand jumps to 3♥ if partner passes 1♠ ? Not being 6-5 there seems like judgment blunder to me. This is assuming they open 1♥ with 6♥-5♠ and decent hand.

Maybe the solution is to pm alerts to operator ?

Yeah, wonderful show I was rooting for Diamond, so 3♠x made me happy :) I wonder why Sontag played that fast. He must have been aware that this contract may swing the match and he instantly went from +790 to -800 at least it looked that way on vugraph. Great match overall. It was good to see that Fred-Brad recovered after tough 3rd segment :)

Yes, sorry I am a moron. I am not sure if it's rare. I think most great 8's and flat 9's will be in that category but that's just my guess. I calculated EV of passing vs bashing so equity of bashing vs passing is the same but with reverse sign, am I missing something here ? I am not surprised as with most 8counts pass so much better. I think it's better to investiga bad 9's not 8's. Just balanced with any 5 card suit possible. 5-4-2-2/6-3-2-2 weren't included.

Ok, so for example holding this hand: [hv=s=sqt5ht4dkj3cqt953]133|100|[/hv] facing 1NT 15-17 (5card major possible) we have the following results: Opposite exactly 15count available tricks (1000 simulated hands): tricks: <7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 128 208 340 246 70 8 0 0 1nt makes: 872 times 2nt makes : 664 times 3nt makes: 324 times opposite 16-17 count: <7 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 61 121 245 315 206 51 0 0 1nt makes: 938 times 2nt makes: 817 times 3nt makes: 572 times Let's compare passing and inviting at IMPs non vulnerable: a)if we face 15 count on 128 hands passing gains 2 imps (undertricks) on 208 hands passing gains 4imps (90 + 50) rest of the hands it doesn't matter. Overall: 1088 imps or 1.08 imp/board b)if we face 16-17count on 61 hands passing wins 3 imps (-50 opposite - 150) on 121 hands pasing gains 5imps (90 + 100) on 245 hands passing gains 5imps (120+50) on 572 hands passing loses 6imps (game versus partscore) Overall: 1419imps or 1.419 imp/board Now we have to determine how often we face exactly 15count and how often we face 16-17. According to my simulator it's: 57.4% for 16-17 and 42.6% for exactly 15. So overall inviting gains 0.35imp/board. Of course at matchpoints the result will be much more convincing.

Strange. I've done some simulations of this kind and I have found that invites outperform bashing at both MP's and IMP's (but at IMPs it's negligible). I am going to make one more simul now and will post the results soon to show what I mean. I usually assume that opener accept invite with any 16-17 while reject with every 15 because this is very close to how I play.