peachy

Wish I could upvote this. Improvement indeed.

1H-2D-3C shows extras or a nice 5-5 will do. 2S just shows shape. There is no need to make the "default minimum hand" bid of 2H when a descriptive bid exists. The next round bidding will be painful in many occasions, if opener does not bid 2S now.

Let the opponents make their own guess. If I have partnership experience or prior occurrences to help me make the guess, then that "PARTNERSHIP EXPERIENCE" must of course be disclosed. You cannot go on playing with your percentage numbers - where are they taken from, or what information are they based on, and how calculated???? And is that calculation to take place at the table? How? It is a YES/NO case whether an AGREEMENT exists or does not exist. Giving MI never protects opponents.

The guess may be wrong for many reasons. Maybe partner knows "I" am from a certain region/country and is bidding the way he thinks "I" would bid... Or maybe my assumptions about the style in partner's country/region are incorrect or outdated. David is absolutely right. Further - it would also be MI to pass on a guess as an agreement.

I have a clue what it means. This thread is in the "SAYC and 2/1 Discussion". You say you don't and won't play 2/1 or SAYC.

There are no more than 8 tricks in the hand. I would think you need to change your card to say 8 tricks if this qualifies as a 2C opener within your partnership agreements. Otherwise it is trickery on the opponents who expect a strong hand. The ACBL rules/regs/establihed practice on judging what is "strong", is vague. That is unfortunate. I mention ACBL because I know jillybean plays in ACBL.

In SAYC, the auction 1♥ 1♠ 2♣ 3♠ is invitational. I don't know where you got it that it would be forcing, the SAYC booklet/writeup clearly says it is invitational. Of course you can play it as whatever you please, but keep SAYC out of it. Do the same (whatever you please) when playing 2/1 system, this auction would be the same in 2/1 (whatever the meaning you have assigned to a jump rebid in same suit by responder). My guesstimate is that at least in US, virtually everybody plays it as invitational.

For me, it should show extras, but the extras can be in the form of a nice looking 5-5. With 5-4 hearts and clubs, definitely need extra raw values.

It was a mechanical error and noticed in time (per the requirements of the law) so there should be no reason to not allow the change. I am surprised at the ruling that the call stands.

North has the right to ask the meaning of the Dbl but he has no right to ask how East "takes it". This whole scenario stinks. If North needed to know, he could have called TD or waited till East gave the answer. So North didn't really need to know the meaning, as evidenced from what happened when he withdrew the badly phrased inquiry without giving East a chance to answer. I would be upset at North's antics whether I was East, South, or West in this case. North has either intentionally or out of crude insensitivity caused trouble and perhaps made East feel embarrassed as well. Oh well. [end of rant] Still, I don't know what to do about it all, if anything.

Almost regardless of what 3H showed, 4NT in this auction is quantitative invite to slam.

"Sane" is relative concept. Relative to system and style.

You can go back to the TD, as he/she suggested you do, and tell the TD it is alertable by virtually any alerting rules or regulations. If it was ACBL, is is specifically regulated alertable. If it was some other tourney, a non-forcing one-level suit response to a one-level opening is extremely unexpected and therefore alertable.

Rather feisty tone in your post. I agree B/I "should" adopt splinters, one of the most useful and easy conventions. However, it is not something that majority of B/I players have on their card - this is my personal observation. The hand is clearly GF - had South been able to properly evaluate it as GF, he/she might have used splinter which is the obvious choice if splinters were on the card. So the problem is in hand evaluation by South.

If 2D is a transfer, in ACBL it needs an alert. I would prefer an announcement rather than alert, but the ACBL regulation on it is clear, so Alert it is. After a diamond or heart transfer response at any level to any level natural notrump opening, overcall or rebid. Bolded emphasis is mine. There are plenty of folks who extend Systems-On to advancing a Dbl of the opposing 1NT opening, and respond as if partner had opened 1NT. Item for Suggestions for Changing laws/regulations, but announcement seems more consistent with the rest of the announcement regulation than an alert, IMO. As to what I would bid, first I need to know what 3C over partner's transfer means in my system.

Many partnerships just call the Dbl of 1NT "Penalty" although their actual agreement is "Equal or better HCP" - the advancer's choices are different opposite "Penalty" than opposite "Equal or better HCP". Opposite PENALTY, all balanced hands pass, weak or not. Opposite the other kind of Double, it is a guessing game to start with.

It depends on what range is agreed, and what style regarding seat and vulnerability. In an "anything goes " style, this is a good hand/ bad suit, but it is so borderline that I really don't know what is best response. In a traditional style (5-10HCP, good 6-card suit) this is clearly bad hand/bad suit. PS. For these reasons, I did not vote.

Neither. It does not ask anything, it shows the Q and J of diamonds.

I support all events to be for players regardless of their gender. I think that the separate women's events are a relic from the past. The Wagar entries this year are lower than ever (not sure of "ever" but lower than before) so that seems to indicate majority of top level women spread out to open or seniors, in ACBL anyway. There is no separate event for women in, for example ACBL, regional level tournaments, only at a level where Championships are awarded in the national organizations or the WBF. Does that tell us something?

Yes I have. Enjoyed it.

Thanks for the info. She was not invisible, I was not invisible, my other friends (at least many/most of them) had retained their friend status. Anyway, I am not going to wonder about this - it happened, its over, hope it doesn't happen again :)

The reason I posted a reply to you is that you said this: "There's a quote in Berkowitz Precision today about alerting 1M pass 4M since it could show opening strength, but again, it is a natural bid, so the ACBL does not require an alert." THE ACBL alert regulations specifically say this is alertable.

Thx matmat. It was easy, I just have never clicked on my own name... No more hearts for me :)

Except for the physical fitness. Some very ill, or very physically unfit/bad shape can play great bridge.

I think somebody is going to bid hearts so the auction will be contested. If by a miracle, it is uncontested 1C-1S-2D-3C (GF, while 2S would be neutral and 2H or 2NT - depending on agreements, would be conventional) and off we go to finding out.