CSGibson

My biggest problem with this is that it is not obvious how to turn off this feature. I don't read the news items in BBO except once in a great while, so this change was fairly new; additionally, I automatically restrict tables where I am hosting, so I had no idea this was going on until other people hosted me & didn't do this - it automatically booted people & gave really annoying messages, and when the host tried to scramble to find an option to turn it off, nothing was there. I love BBO, but this change made me yell at my computer how much I hate this feature - its even worse for those who are unaware of what they need to do to stop it, because then all sorts of random players jump into the spot that was previously your friend who had a tough problem.

Thanks Barry, I tried to find another topic post about it, but didn't look in the correct forum. Put me down on the list that its necessary to make it obvious to people how to turn it off, not just have forum discussions and BBO news that 95% of users don't read.

That's insane. What partner would bid 3N with that after you've shown 6 hearts & 4 spades?

There seems to be an annoying new "feature" where BBO will give 2 warnings for slow play and then kick out a person who does not play. Is there a way to turn that off in the options? I didn't see something like that, and it really makes the user experience much less enjoyable, especially in a set game.

I've been playing with this problem - what I've been experimenting with is using the lowest cue to "flag" slam interest in the minor, and any other cue to be for the major, with 4N as a regressive offer to play. I have no real results to report yet, I haven't trotted it out in a partnership setting.

I have promised 11+ HCP, 4 spades, and extra length in hearts, but at this point I think I am unlimited. Partner has suggested wastage in the minors, and is very likely to have a singleton or void in hearts - we probably have a trump loser, and maybe 2. I am all for self-immolation when the circumstances call for it, but I think bidding 4♦ is poor, and should not be a LA. I cannot imagine that 4♦ would poll out to meet the threshold to be a LA, especially with the double, whatever the meaning - either righty has asked for a club lead, or its take-out, and he has likely spade length/strength, to go with the probable heart loser.

show the 7-10 raise. You have really soft values, and the 5th trump may not be pulling its weight since you have so little in the way of ruffing values. Put it another way, you have one definite cover card (heart ace), and may cover 3 other losers in partner's hand, but it is very unlikely - all the covers are of 3rd round losers in hearts, spades, and diamonds. A limit raise should be more.

If you go whole-ham into this no-invite style when balanced opposite balanced, you can do a whole lot after stayman/transfers using 2N as a relay to 3♣ - you can now bid weak hands with a 4 card major & 6 card minor much more effectively, and go through some choice-of-games showing good or poor suits. It also facilitates slam exploration to use 1N-2C; 2S-3S as a slam try - you can get in specific cues at a lower level, or just make use of a non-serious 3N to differentiate between different levels of slam suitability. If you are interested, I have system notes that I believe use the freed bids very well if you choose to try the never invite strategy.

If I had a partner that bid like North then had the temerity to criticize my own auction as the reason we didn't get to slam, I'd stop playing with them - they obviously don't "get it" on many different levels.

I don't like 1N or the pass of a 1N overcall (which should have a higher threshold than 1N openers; a good 15-18 is standard). I'd have to know our agreements to know how I feel about X of 2♥; if double is take-out I'm ok with the first X, if it is penalty oriented then I don't like it. Either way, I really don't like the double of 3♣ with only 3, and with dummy's marked spade shortage; partner could have doubled if doubling was right. In my opinion, though, the worst call was 1N. I would have preferred (in order) X or pass before 1N. To forestall questions, I would pass any club calls by partner & hope for the best. I apportion blame as about 50-50. Neither E nor W bid well in my opinion, and if either had made different choices, the result would have been different.

The UI matches the AI has won many appeals in the NABC casebooks; the precedent indicates it is a valid line of reasoning.

the UI from the break in tempo matches the AI from the auction - partner is marked with enough values to consider a call when the opps pass 2♠

Because I feel like giving the whole hand may unconsciously bias this, I set up a bridgewinners poll to determine the likely outcome if I had doubled instead of bidding. I would appreciate it if this thread was not mentioned in the comments, and that any insider information gleaned from this thread also be kept out of the comments on that poll to help avoid biasing the result.

double - two places to play, one of which is a major as I play it. I will correct spade bids to diamonds at all levels.

Do you think partner should bid 5H over X?

ok, was just curious. Full hand was: [hv=pc=n&s=saq8742hakt8daq9c&w=s63hqd652cakj8752&n=skt9hj97542dk8ct9&e=sj5h63djt743cq643&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=4cp5c5sppp]399|300[/hv] Doubling does better than 5♠ when partner can't find the raise, but the real winners on this layout are those that forced to slam

I tried both versions (web-based & download), neither worked.

[hv=pc=n&s=saq8742hakt8daq9c&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=4cp5c]133|200[/hv] Grand national teams, against one of the better teams, they put it to you with this preempt. X with this partner will be rarely removed at this level.

In a world where opponents do not bid 3 or 4S, maybe you could play lebensohl effectively in this situation. In our real world, its important to have a bid that unambiguously is a limit raise+ so that you can make intelligent decisions vs later competition. Edit: I don't think I read the treatment correctly, it looks like you do have a limit raise that's something other than a multiple meaning bid.

In response to your question, I have the following scheme: 5N is 2 keycards & a useful void. IF keycard responder has shown opening values, then: with 1 keycard, answer 1 and make a decision about whether to go on to slam opposite a sign-off based on your previous auction with 3 keycards, answer the void at the 6 level, or 6 of our suit with a higher void. IF keycard responder has not shown opening values, then: with 1 keycard, answer the void at the 6 level, or 6 of our suit with a higher void. with 3 keycards, show 3 & cue-bid the void later if possible.

I am no longer able to create new convention cards. I can start a new form, and even "save", but when I exit, no convention card actually gets saved to my profile. What are the possible causes of this?

I don't think so. I think our only consideration would be is he more likely to get it right if he saw the 13th card in dummy, especially since this does not appear to be a double-shot, based on the timing of the discovery of the infraction. I think he is more likely to get it right.** **To be noted, my knowledge of the law or how to apply it is in no way definitive.

I'm pretty sure that 2 down is correct, or no adjustment. I see no reason why they would not get a 2nd ruff. that being said, I'm pretty sure that a diamond switch is either nullo or close to it; partner cannot have both a club card and a diamond card.

I hate to open anything other than my longest suit, but I hate reversing on a 10 count even more, so I'm opening 1♥. As for part II, opponents appear to have 9+ spades and haven't found them; I'm guessing that partner is getting a surprise spade lead. I am going to bid 4♣ now, though I admit its a guess. Hopefully partner figures out I have boatloads of clubs and hearts.

Why would we ever be forced to ruff a 3rd club if partner is 3=2=5=3? Can't we just discard a heart from hand?