bluecalm

This is interesting. I thought 3♦ is typically 5-4 and looking for ♥ stopper, something like: xx xx KQxx AKJxx What would you bid with that hand ?

Our score is 111/160 anybody else care to confirm theirs ? Especially people around 10th place :)

Yeah, this is much better. I saw this somewhere. I can't recall where now unfortunately. Gotta browse my cc's archives. EDIT: Greco - Hampson cc from Bermuda Bowl 2005. LOL ! I mean this is truly retarded... How the hell gambling is allowed and this one not ?

We played 2♠ on those cards. I guess you pasted wrong results with wrong layouts thus confusion. I will wait for edits before commenting on more boards.

After precision 2♣ opener from E this hand is too easy :P

You posted wrong layout here...

We played 4♠ on this board after an auction: 1D pas 1NT 2D pas3S pas 4S Please correct !

4♠ being 10 while 3♠ being 4 is strange. It was supposed to be matchpoints. 4♠ aren't that super contract and the one which is unlikely to be reach by many matchpoint pairs while 3♠ beats all other partials and often games. I was happy to be in ♠ partial after seeing our cards and it's still my contract of choice at mp's.

I don't get the scoring method. 3♥ is normal contract and there is no way it would score a top at MP's. It seems that some hands are scored by one method and other by different one. Any sane pair (not us) should have no trouble staying out of 4♥ so bidding 3♥ would net you 60% board - tying with all sane pairs, beating all the idiots (like us) :)

This is interesting. I think many pairs were in the same spot (opener showing weak nt type). I think probably W should gf opposite that having sure 8 tricks. Our prec auction: 1♦ - 2♣ 2♥ - 3♣ ? pass 2♥ was 11-13 bal 3♣ was invitational (responder could choose to signoff or game force instead).

I don't want to be in 4♥ here at MP's. Can't imagine that contract would score more than 3NT in real field.

Why 4♠ from E is that much worse ? K♥ don't need to be offside. For example we opened this hand 2NT and got to 4♠ from other side and I wouldn't expect to get so few MP's for that.

Everything is clear, thanks.

Yeah I don't see the problem. If there is no way in the system to show later that you don't have what you promise now it's not psychic control. Example of psychic control would be: 1♦ - 1♠ = spades 2♠ - 3♦ = I don't have spades afterall. In precision you don't have it.

Hi 655321, what about giving me some example hands you would double with in this situation so I can finally understand what kind of double you guys play here ? To Hog: have you actually played this method yourself and have seen the results it yields or you just don't like it because it looks stupid to you ?

So what ? If I open 3♠ and announce it as preemptive with spades then even word class opponents will need a lot of guesswork, probably even more than after your 2NT bid.

Yeah ok. I was asking about hands he would double with assuming his favorite agreements, not the ones I gave in OP. I just want to understand what kind of hands are good dbl's assuming you have the best agreements there.

I just don't understand that first you say: and then you give 3 hands which all wants to defend 4♠. What am I missing ?

Those are all "let's defend doubles"... :P

I can do simuls, just tell me some example hands for 1♥ bidder.

I think no because good opponents will have more space available. Agreement I like against all transfer like preempts is that double is t/o to real suit (or in that case to one of the minors) and pass and then dbl is heavy NT like double. This really makes it simpler for opponents. For this reason I refuse to play the following: -namyats -convention you described -transfer preempts Gambling 3NT has some merirts because at least you will often get to play there. The more bids you have for transfer preempts the worse it is so if you insist on namyats I still wouldn't play 3NT as broken minor.

In Poland we play that 1♥ promises some values (because 1♦ is negative) so all new suits and jump in NT is forcing to game. After other openers than 1♣ you have their suit as a forcing bid available so there aren't many problems there. If somehow partner refuses to play 1♦ as negative I would insist on playing 2♣ as artificial one round force in this auction.

Yes, as now we can have disastrous result playing 5-1 fit. I don't know what hand I would pass I think this style of bidding sucks hard. Probably only bidding 2M with KQTxx etc.

Always 2M I think. Maybe some bizzare hands may pass. If you find 5-3 fit it's huge gain whiel 5-2 is on average just as good as 1NT i believe.

I like support doubles too but I think gains from them are a bit overrated. By not playing them you are making life difficult for opponents too as they are now facing possibility of you being on only 7 trumps in your part score after a simple raise in which case competing to 3level may be disastrous for them.