andy_h

Used to have one with a partner a while ago. It was 2NT-3NT-4C-4NT, when he sometimes forgets 3NT isn't a to play bid, but after opener shows interest, and after a few mishaps we decided 4NT over that is "I forgot". But I reckon after we made that agreement, he never forgot it again.

Even in acol it's GF.

I understand the security measures that need to be taken, but as a kibitzer I prefer the same boards being played so I get to know what other players did on those specific boards. If I was player I might prefer the same boards being played too so at the end of the day I can discuss with friends what they did on those same boards too. Yeah it's true that you can now discuss more boards, but it just doesn't have the same feel to it lol. Bad breaks or 'wild' ones have no effect. Luckiness/unluckiness happens all the time. That's bridge, deal with it. Your opponent's at the other table get the same hands too, so they too have to deal with it. I'm guessing in the end it probably doesn't really matter.

5D but not liking it. If RHO bid 5C to make at red, it's likely that he'll have short diamonds so partner should have some length in diamonds (since RHO might have bid 3NT with more diamonds). There's even a chance that we can make 5D if RHO had bid 5C to make (short clubs) and leading spades up towards your hand against RHO's stronger hand.

Not a fan, and never will be one, of 2-way 1NT's, whether it's an opening or an overcall. Your constructive bidding will be immensely impaired and you'll be way behind than others who have a natural 1NT opening. Also, some 6card minor hands (say 4D-6C or 1336 etc) at the correct vulnerability can be opened as a preempt which takes away way more space than a 1NT opening will do. Just think of it like, if you open 1NT with 6card minor hands, it gives the opponent's more space than a preempt will do even when partner makes a pass/correct bid too. If you mainly play matchpoints, you might as well play all 2x openings as weak and give up strong 2C :(

Club. Not a fan of Jx leads as it could blow a trick or two. Seems more likely that partner would have a single heart honour.

I cannot fathom a 1NT bid even in matchpoints. If the Ace of hearts is knocked out there may be zero entries for the diamonds to set up, thus playing in a diamond partial is wayy better so your partner should rebid 2D. After his 1NT and 4th seat X'd, your partner's pass (instead of 2D) is lol. And yes, I would also have X'd 2H with your hand given how the auction went.

are we allowed scales?

I'll attempt the flow with the negatives. I wouldn't understand anything else but 1S.

Given the vulnerability, I would prefer 1C then 2C by north. South shouldn't introduce hearts but should bid 3S given the 3C. Once you diagnose the misfitting (no club or spade fit) hands, 6NT should be out of the radar. (Of course I also prefer the route of 1C, 2C then 4C by north like Josh) If South really wanted to punt a slam, at least punt 6C where there's a chance that you can ruff out some spades.

That's certainly very courageous of partner coming back into the auction with 12-14 3433!

I'm not ashamed of 1NT at all. There's a chance we could belong in a better partial and if partner invites in diamonds, hearts or spades, they're all fine for me. The downside is that 1S could be our last making contract or that partner may invite in NT so we get to 2NT. This is assuming we have 2-way checkback at our disposal.

low spade

1NT

Ray Lee's insightful comments on what it's like to be a BBO commentator, at http://ray.bridgeblogging.com/?p=159 are well worth reading. http://www.bridgeblogging.com/ is the main website of his blog. Peter Gill, still accidentally in disguise whenever I use this forum.

The previous post was written by Peter Gill. I have no idea why my laptop credited (debited??) it to Andy Hung.

Hi Stefan Skorchev, Warning: very long post Stefan wrote: "the opportunity to play often at vugraph. A bad opportunity." Stefan, you are a young bridge player in your early 20's who has represented Bulgaria successfully at bridge, almost winning a Medal in Beijing last year. Imagine that you were instead a young football star, making your debut for Inter Milan. Then you watch a match video in which a commentator says that you deliberately fell in the penalty area, trying to get a free kick for a foul which didn't happen. It would be an over-reaction for you to take this too seriously. Many football players have been accused like that, but the best ones don't worry about it, they simply return to play the game that they love to play. Such is life. Commentators and the media make mistakes. Those in the public eye do best to ignore it. If you think that such an experience would make it "a bad opportunity" for you as a young Bulgarian football star to play for Inter Milan, you are mad. Being in the public spotlight comes with the need to ignore what is said about you by commentators. Some celebrities worry about the press picking on them and commenting on their private lives - it is all part of being in the public eye. If bridge is to become a serious sport, we need a free press, allowed to make mistakes. Perhaps you would prefer for bridge commentary to be like the Bulgaria that existed just before you were born? Another factor is relevant here. At football, there are ex-players (those aged about 35+) who become commentators. At bridge there's no such thing as an ex-player. Thus the expertise of the commentators at bridge can be expected to be lower than the expertise of the players. Hence it is not surprising that the commentators frequently try to understand the bids but end up with no understanding. The same applies to BBO Commentary. Roland gives us commentators guidelines, we try to follow them, but sometimes it is 2am where we live, or for some other reason, we make mistakes. Bridge players make mistakes too. In my opinion, having done a lot of both playing on BBO Vugraph and commentating, it is much easier to play championship bridge than to commentate well on BBO. Roland frequently asks top players (including me, often) who are watching BBO Vugraph to join in the commentary when there's a shortage of commentators. Your suggestion of some unusual motive for Roland asking you to commentate is a problem in your own mind - Roland's motives are pure, his only wish being that the standard of the commentary is improved by adding you as a commentator. Stefan Skorchev wrote: "commentator ... should enter the tournament web-site and download our convention card" Peter Gill writes: i.e. go to http://www.bridge.bg/en_UK/tournament81.html then click on Popov - Skorchev Convention Card to look up the responses to the Precision 1D .... what do I find? The responses and rebids after 1D section of that Convention Card, despite vast amounts of blank space being available, is blank. This is not a criticism of you - this sort of thing is fairly normal - it is just the way the world is. Stefan wrote: "I hold: Jx 109xx AKxxxx A I open 1♦, my partner bids one 1♠, I'm 2♦, my partner bid 2nt=invitational and I consider myself to raise to 3nt because 2♦ shows 11-13 and 5+ ♦, I have 12 good points with 6 cards. The bid of 3nt should be just automatical. The commentator mentioned before comments "and I have no understanding as to why North [this is me] would raise to 3N"." Peter Gill writes: "You should not interpret the commentator's comment as a criticism. All the commentator wrote was that he did not understand why you bid as you did. As previous posters to this thread have written, you are being over-sensitive. Get used to it. Be realistic. Don't be so idealistic. Do not expect commentators to be super-human. Even if the commentator looked at your Convention Card with its blank 1D section, he still would have no understanding of your 2D bid unless he had played a lot of Precision. Commentators have to be scheduled in advance, so it is impossible for Precision-playing commetnators to be scheduled when a Precision pair happens to appear at a table. We commentators often don't know which players are at our table until the first hand starts, making it an extremely demanding task for us to analyse the hand fast from four different players' points of view, write fast, answer queries from specs, receive advice from specs, track down Convention Cards from websites that often are not in English and which frequently lack the Convention Cards for which we search, give background info about the event and the players, read the other commentators' comments and re-analyse the play as it unfolds. Stefan, rather than complain, how about doing something more constructive? You could use your spare time to create a Database of Convention Cards for BBO Commentators to use. Start with Bulgaria, and go from there. Or you could post your guidelines for commentators in more detail. Roland already advises new commentators with some general guidelines, including that less experienced players on Vugraph should not be criticised too much, but in the National Open Playoff semis of one of the world's top bridge 15 countries (Bulgaria), surely it is reasonable for the commentator to try to figure out what's going on, even if the lack of response/rebid section of a Convention Card makes that difficult? Remember, what is obvious to you about Precision is not necessarily obvious to other people, such as commentators. We can only try, and sometimes we fail. The operators in many countries are youth internationals such as yourself, giving back to the game they love by being BBO operators. Did you make an offer to the administrators in Bulgaria that once you lost your semi-final you were available as a relieving BBO operator for the Final if any of the operators wants a break? Stefan wrote: "I think there should be a huge restrictions about this who is commentating." There is an increasing number of BBO vugraphs to cover, with less commentators available. This supply and demand problem is escalating, and is made worse when people such as you and me turn down offers from Roland for us to commentate. Stefan wrote: Now some smart commentator says that probolaly the best is if my partner lead the 2nd from four smalls .... At least the commentator is trying to get at the solution to the cardplay problem, i.e. doing his job. You cannot expect every commentator to get to the right conclusion every time, because then the commentators would be the world champions at bridge, if they were that good. My summary: If you as a player or spectator on BBO start off with the perception that the commentators are bad, then you will obtain plenty of evidence to back up your contention. If you treat commentators as fallible human beings who make mistakes just like everyone else, then you will enjoy the commentary much more. And finally, well done, making the semis of such a tough event at such a young age is a good effort. Peter Gill Sydney Australia

Easy 2D. Everything else is either a misdesription or an overbid.

I wouldn't, at unfav.

Quatre. Cherish the 5-5 shape.

Partner has a spade void and is now inviting slam on his own. I'm guessing 5♥ over my 4♥ would have been asking for trump quality and would have been made typically with ATxx or KTxx so it seems certain he has AKxx support. If he has 0436 with ♥AK ♣AK combo there's a chance he might've bid 4♣ over our 1♥. So typically his hand could be - AKxx AQx AQxxxx or - AKxx AQxx AKxxx or - ATxx AKxx AKxxx (even 5lvl could be dangerous if that). I think if we have Kxxx in our hearts (or better) we should not have another key card like ♣K but we can have 2 kings if our trump suit was Jxxx or worse. I think if our doubleton was in clubs it would be more attractive to bid slam, so I will probably just sign off.

1) At first I thought 4♣, thinking 6-5 should compensate enough for it since if I bid 3♣ now and LHO bids 4♠, is partner able to judge well? But then again, we are unfavourable and don't seem to be the type to be sacrificing. I think I will bid 4♣ anyway as we're most typically at least 5-5 for this action and partner can x if he so wishes. He could have a singleton heart with declarer's diamond finesses wrong. 2nd choice is 3♣ 2) Hmm MPs and we're favourable. Is partner the type to respond with <4 counts? He could easily just have a 7 count anyways, so 3♥ it is. 3) Length of 1♣ was not defined? If for whatever reason 1♣=4+♣ then I bid 3♣, if not this seems like a wtp pass. Nil vul at MP, don't see a reason to bid when partner can be 4333, right? 4) Ideally I want to X and then bid 2♠. What if in the offchance that LHO rebids 2♥ and partner bids 3m? Is 3♠ natural? I honestly don't have that agreement with my partnership. A direct 2♠ seems like an underbid, what about pass then 3♠? That could turn out bad as well, so I will bid 2♠. 5) Hmm matchpoints.. Quite a few hands will make slam I think so I will bid 4♣. But I do feel like bidding 3NT because it 'describes my hand' but if we do bid that, wouldn't partner also think 3♣ also 'described his hand' also? Anyway, I will be declaring clubs so that makes it look more attractive.

shubiiii

I'm an aggressive 1 level overcaller so both of these seem like an easy 1S. Come in at a low level, we could buy it in 2S, partner raising it to 3 could be a devastating effect. Don't think I can be convinced to pass on any of them, especially at this vulnerability.

Would also have doubled in the first round. And now I will bid 5S.