lilboyman

First Amendment,being about free speech, makes it unlikely that any judge, even a Florida judge, would issue an injunction on the grounds suggested in the Bridge Winners post. Even the posting of the site closing would have violated the injunction. Conclusion: APRIL FOOL.

OPENER RESPONDER 1 Club 1 Spade 2 NT(18-19 Balanced) 3 Spades In a 2/1 or SAYC context, is 3 Spades to play or a choice of games?

I have heard from various experienced match point players, that that most 12 point hands, some 11 point hands, and a few 10 point hands should always be opened even when playing 2 over 1 at match points. They claim it is always best to get you licks in ahead of the opponents since the opens your whole system of agreements for use and impedes the opponents. The problem I see with this approach is that partner may make a game forcing bid with opening values but yet the combined assets will never make game. What is the best approach to avoid this occurrence?

What are the advantages and disadvantages of leading 3rd or fifth best against suit contracts and when does one lead 3rd best and when does one lead 5th best?

In their 2006 notes at one competition, if they don't rebid their Major, they are showing a longer minor or an unbalanced 3 suiter. See: http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files...oth-rodwell.pdf Notes are on last page.

An alternative way of evaluating hands is to consider the "losing trick count." Take a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Losing-Trick_Count There are two methods shown there which, if used, would mitigate against a pass over south's 2 Heart bid, assuming the partnership has agreed that 2 Hearts promised at least 6 cards.

To see Meckwell's convention card for last world championship go to this link: http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files...oth-rodwell.pdf

You double because you can see that 3 of the 4 suits aren't running.

Just wondering, does everyone agree with west's negative double at IMPs?

If you haven't discussed this situation with partner, imho you should not be using this convention. Absent discussion I don't think I could conclude partner was bidding for slam in Clubs.

Seems to me that 2 Hearts understates the game potential of this hand. The 2 diamonds (0-7 HCP) by partner allows a lot of room for heart support and one or two cover cards and this would make game a reasonable outcome.

Since your scenario has you protecting 3 suits, an additional thought would be to have one of your long suits discards to tell partner what suit you want partner to protect.

Eric Rodwell discusses weak NTs pros and cons at this url: http://www.bridgematters.com/rodwell.htm

Technical skill in playing cards. Mastery of bidding agreements. Good bidding judgement. Being a good partner. Be able to read people.

Amen! Fred

My first choice is 3D. It tells one lie. The strength of my diamonds. 2 Spades lies about strength & support and shape. 2 Clubs lies about strength and shape.

Partner has 6 Clubs, 5 Diamonds, 2 Spades and a Heart void. P was willing to play Spades if you had a 6 card suit. Your 3N confirmed a 5 card Spade suit. P now knows this probably plays better in one of the minors and show the 5 Diamonds with the 4 Diamond bid. After your 4 Spades P wants to show the Heart void and get you to make a choice between the minors. Probably, P harbors thoughts of slam in the suit of fit and must have two very good minors.

4 Spades is likely the last level to which you can safely bid (-500 vs -620/680), unless they confidently and voluntarily bid slam on their own. In that case a sacrifice seems okay (-1100 vs 1430). I think the best way to know what to do is to pass for now. If they settle in 4 Hearts, you can bid 4 Spades and if they confidently bid a slam, take the sac. I think letting the Spade fit out of the bag now lets opps reach conclusions about how many Spade losers they have and I would rather keep them in the dark for now. I should add that I expect partner to be withing 4 tricks of making 3 Spades for his preempt.

Interesting double by your partner. From partner's point of view, the opps could have as much as 24 HCP and still partner doubles. I believe that partner must be void in Hearts to justify this action. Do I want to defend 2 Hearts doubled with partner holding 5/4 in the minors and 4 Spades. I think I would rather risk playing in our 8 card minor fit and accordingly would bid 2 NT, pick a minor.

First I ask the opponents what double means in their methods. If I am informed that the double is for penalty then 2♦.

Since your rho passed, either lho has a big hand or partner is sitting behind lho with a more than decent 1 level overcall. In either case, game for the either side doesn't look too likely and a plus or the smallest possible minus should give a decent score at matchpoints. I personally would try a weak jump shift to 2 Hearts. This should have a reasonable play if passed out since our side has a side fit in Diamonds. If doubled we can run out to 3 Diamonds and if partner has the big hand and raises Hearts absent more competition we may have a double fit game.

Since this is matchpoints, I think I will just bid 3NT. To expect partner to cover my 8 losers with a balanced 20/21 seems to be pressing a bit. Making 3NT won't be a bottom but going down in a higher contract will be very bad if not bottom.

The problem with SAYC is that it is not that "standard." If one looks at the ACBL SAYC booklet: (http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/SP3%20(bk)%20single%20pages.pdf), a rebid by opener of 3 Clubs is 13 to 18 and, hence, is not necessarily game forcing. In that case responder's 4 Clubs could be considered invitational agreeing to Clubs. If responder is afraid 4 Clubs will lead to pass or 5 Clubs, then a skip to 4NT is understandable. That being said, most better players would consider 3 Clubs as game forcing and as pointed out in posts above, 4NT could be quantitative. So, in a regular partnership whether 3C is a game force has to be discussed as well as what 4NT would mean here. With casual online play its just a guess. A common agreement for 1430 is that absent suit agreement one should answer for the last bid suit. Responder should be able to handle that no matter what.

Thanks, Ken.

Thanks Robert