peachy

We had system mixup with this. We used to play 3NT was "4m opener" and I forgot we had changed. Anyway, our auction was 3NT-PPP :blink:

1D-1S-2H-2S is neutral, just showing 5-card spade suit. The "forcing" aspect comes from the fact that opener has promised a third when when he reverses, so opener cannot pass 2S. Even if 2S is agreed as weak hand, it still cannot be passed. 1D-1S-2H-3C is natural and GF, if playing Lebensohl or BWS, where 2NT is artificial. In Leb, 2NT is relay to 3C and responder will place the contract (even pass 3C if that was one of opener's suits). In BWS, 2NT is also artificial, indicating a hand that wants to stop in partscore opposite regular reverse. Raises are forcing while raise via the artificial relay are not forcing. The bottom line is, make agreements. In the end responder should be happy to play in the 6-2 fit, opener was only showing his shape and has clearly shown 3-4-6-0. PS. Sorry this sounds on later reading like I am imposing a system on somebody. This is what I expect a good player to play, don't know how to edit so it wouldn't come off as "teaching".

Sandwich NT is general terms is understood as "the unbid suits and weakish" while Natural NT is "NT hand". The term itself just means 'sandwiched between two bidding opponents' but it is AFAIK understood to mean the unusual NT, not the natural one but it can't be both. As to the bidding choice, what have you agreed it to mean when partner transfers to one of the opponent's suit, clubs in this case?

Thanks again Ed, Free, Jan, Frances, everybody.

He can have determined, for example, to play the queen from QJ doubleton on odd numbered board and the jack on even numbered boards. Tossing a coin to ensure that he adopts the correct strategy does seem like a clear .... aid to technique to me. Let us say that on every hand with three small trumps where a defender does not want to convey any signal but wants to play them randomly. His rolling of a die and looking at it is both an aid to technique and UI to his partner that the choice was entirely random. In our example, UI cannot occur as he is declarer, but it is still an aid to technique. This player has determined ahead of game time just like any other player has, that when he is at a guess as to which line to take, he will do a coin toss instead of doing "this" on odd numbered days and "that" on even numbered days, or any other random criteria. He just happened to announce his method to the table. Declarer can do that when he is at a guess, defenders can't. The issue is the coin which apparently bothered the SB, perhaps exacerbated by the fact that declarer got the suit right. Moreover, is A Guess included in Technique :)

Where can I get the Word file? http://www.ecatsbridge.com/documents/files...nkWBFCCWord.doc Thanks, I also found it later on the ecats site (not hard, scroll down a bit....) Appreciate the help!

You would do this when it is explicitly against the Conditions of the Contest both in ACBL and at WBF events, with MP or IMP penalty or even expulsion from the event for second or continued violation if you get caught?

Players do a "coin toss" in their head all the time when there is no clue which line is optimal/percentage, or declarer forgot to count the hands earlier, or declarer was not of adequate skill to count hands, or the count achieved was of no use, etc. etc. What is a player to do then if he can't do a coin toss, with or without the actual coin? Stay there and never play a card... Indeed, "Dear SB, Get a Life"

It is the same :(

Where can I get the Word file?

I downloaded from www.ecatsbridge.com the official WBF Convention Card Editor. I am completely lost as to how to navigate it to get a simple 2/1 card filled out. Can someone help me, or maybe provide a link to an intelligible program somewhere else where I can get this sys card done. THANKS for any help you can give. I have Windows Vista in case it matters. Excited to go to Philly, this will be my first WBF event, in the Mixed Pairs, with a pickup partner no less and last minute plans. I really need this experience to have more sympathy for those foreign players who come to ACBL events and sometimes act like deer in the headlights. I will be the deer now :) If anyone wants to say hello to me while there, I am 5'3" average slim, brown shoulder length hair and wrinkly face older lady with a smile - unless I was just blinded by the headlights...

*destructive* was perhaps meant as the opposite of *constructive* but nevertheless, the term means different things to different people, as can be evidenced by the hand actually held. Same goes to *preemptive*, it does not mean the same to everybody. Still, explanations should be given in a language the opponents understand, such as HCP, suit lengths, etc. Even though I do think this is MI, the opponents should have asked if they wanted to know what it means, to the bidder and his partner.

Good example of incontrovertible intention is when declarer calls for a "club" while at the same time pointing finger to the ceiling. Or "run the clubs". Or "finesse" when there is AQ in dummy. Of course none of these is the right way to call for a card from dummy but the intention in all these examples is clear. The cases you posted, declarer may not change the card that was called.

In ACBL, clubs have virtually unlimited right to regulate conventions and set other rules (whether strictly in accordance of the laws or not) as long as they are announced/posted on their bulletin board or some other way of letting the players know of the rules. Running a business that the customers want to visit, comes first.

Passing a forcing 1NT is masterminding. The fact that your partner did it too is irrelevant.

I like 1H-1S-2D much better. With 6-4, both suits of good quality, and a hand that is not minimum, 3D is a better rebid. That gives responder a chance to appreciate diamond fillers and also to find out that opener is not a balanced minimum. Depending on style, 2H rebid by opener could be something like xx-Qxxxx-AKx-QJx in which case 4H is plenty high enough!

Opening 2C with offensive two suiter and two voids is asking for trouble; trouble may not always materialize but typically it will, in one form or another. Usually, we get too high too soon to conduct a proper investigation of strain and level. If the hand had so many HCP that it is easy to imagine it could go 1S-P-P-P, then there is no remedy other than open it 2C, but this hand IMO is not it. I open 1S, GF with 3H, and see what develops. It is a good agreement to have that responder must not pass if he holds one ace (and nothing else) or a KQ in one suit (and nothing else). Many are afraid of a sudden pass and therefore strain to open 2C with distributional play-strong hands.

Similarly, what self-respecting person needs a phone book, just memorize the darn numbers. It is possible, you know... But if there is a list of phone numbers or a phone book readily available, why should one strain one's memory, just look it up. What a stupid analogy! Am I allowed to have a written defence to a sayc 1C opening? Why not? I notice that you are good at making fatuous comments but not so good when it comes to providing logical reasons therefore. Logical reason for what?

Thread hijack again.

If it was 2/1 system, then respond 1H. The auction could have been 1C-1D-1NT, where opener can have one or both 4-card majors and he is just limiting his hand as balanced minimum. You will miss 4-4 heart fit opposite invitational or weaker responder if responder does not bid his major first. With gameforcing hands, it is correct to respond 1D first and then over opener's 1NT, to bid hearts. 1C-1D-1S tends to show an unbalanced hand. To answer your questions: 1. No. 2. Yes, but only with hands that do not have a 4-card major. 3. N/A

On theoretical level, it is a good sign that having played bridge for only 18 months, you think about what rebids will be before you open. There are some hands that are worthy of that consideration but they are rare. I am definitely recommending that you should make the systemic opening EVERY time. That trains your partners to trust you and trains you to stick to the methods that were agreed. Both are good things!

I would open the N hand, and I am certain so would most other people. As it turns out, we can still recover after N passed. South failed to appreciate the double fit, he cannot just give a tepid preference to spades with such a good hand. Well, he can and he did, but it was not a good choice.

Playing with GIB, all the fancy systems will backfire so maybe y'all might reconsider. Must bid what GIB understands. That would be either 3C (GF, ostensibly natural) or 3D (good hand with long diamonds)

I agree with should. But not if there is no law that is actually broken. If there is no law that adequately covers a rare situation such as *attempted to cheat* the TD has the explicit power to penalize or rectify as he sees fit. I would see it totally fit to use that clause here.

Similarly, what self-respecting person needs a phone book, just memorize the darn numbers. It is possible, you know... But if there is a list of phone numbers or a phone book readily available, why should one strain one's memory, just look it up.