peachy

It is not a psych if you decide to open this hand; well, unless you open 1D or 1H.

I have no problem alerting but the alert regs I am familiar with are ACBL. People from other countries know their regs. This is all a fun and friendly thing so probably would be going overboard to establish which alerting regulations we should follow :rolleyes:

No, we don't. Everybody is making assumptions, and there's a good chance those assumptions - whether or not in favor of South - are wrong. Which means the suggested rulings based on those assumptions are also probably wrong. The TD has the authority to rule even when there is no hard evidence or the facts are unclear or in dispute. The TD can assign something the status of "fact" by using his judgment and basing such judgment on the "preponderance of evidence" or, "more likely than not", and rule _as if_ it was a fact. So a ruling based on TD's reasoned judgment [which you may call "assumption" but I would not] is not wrong.

Once the play starts you can see each card as it is played, so the use of screens doesn't obfuscate partner's tempo. If South plays a fast ♠2 when he has a singleton club and a slow ♠2 when he doesn't, that conveys UI. The UI constrains North's actions. That applies with screens or without, and it applies both in the Spingold final and at your local club. E-W play a club system so E's X didn't promise hearts, I don't think. Only semi-positive values. So if North (hypothetically speaking) figured out declarer was exactly 2434 and knew that a switch elsewhere wouldn't give away the contract, then is he no longer obligated to switch to a club here? Or is it still required? Sorry if this seems obvious to a lot of people, this isn't something I think I've ever encountered (or if I have the problem didn't occur to me at the time) so I'm just trying to make sure I understand it. There is really not much to understand. Let us put aside the hand in question and speak of the general principle. The bridge laws say - and I am just making it a simplified thing without quoting the actual law, but you could read it yourself if you like: When a player has Unauthorised Information (partner's haste, hesitancy, mannerism, remark, facial expression, sigh, etc. doesn't matter what it is), the player must carefully avoid taking any advantage of that UI. Very simple.

Has he? Frankly, I want to hear it from him, and we haven't. And what will he say? hehe... There is no way of knowing, whatever he will say. If he is honest, he was not trying that ploy in the first place. If he is not honest, he won't be admitting it. I am not in any way fond of or approving of East's comment. It deserves whatever the TD decides. But maybe being at the table and knowing South's capabilities could help determine what happened. He could easily be clueless and flustered and not aware that round was called. We just don't know.

I might have overcalled 3C directly. Now, we have to forget about playing in NT. Choice is between 3C -[with Lebensohl, promises 8+ HCP and 5+ clubs but which was not good enough for a direct overcall] and 4C- [shows a great hand and long suit]

I started a new thread having read a comment in the "Tentative Results" thread. My opinion is that there should be no alerting in the bidding contest. First, because alerting rules around the world vary and, second, because there are no opponents who care or want to know.

The problem is if they bid 4♥, you don't know if RHO has an 18 count with 5 spades or what. It's so much safer to act the first time, if he doubles you it's a level lower and maybe opener with short spades / lots of offense / etc will get in his way and just bid 4♥ over 3♠ first. Good point. I just might change my mind. What worries me is that we will end up in 4S if partner has opening hand and support. Maybe I shouldn't worry about the fate of 4S?

Pass, no need to give vulnerability or anything.

Pass, then 3S in the balancing seat. The one with shortness in their suit should take action but doing it immediately with this hand is not wise, not enough values. in the given auction, partner might have an opening hand but with heart length so he couldn't do anything. Even if he only has the expected about 10, 3S should do well.

25-27 for 3NT opening does not disturb 2/1 system at all. If you like it, continue using it. If you like Gambling better, then switch. But before switching, agree on 1) what constitutes a solid suit 2) what opener can have on the side 3) don't use it in 4th seat 4) what are the followups when partner wants to remove from 3NT for some reason.

Quite possibly. Or maybe East is just impatient. That's not evidence that this South is using it in this case. That's good, because there isn't one. That's not evidence that this South is using it in this case.

Unfortunately with a two count, and some spades, game is excellent on the bidding. xxx Qxxx xxx xxx. Change the Qxxx to Jxxx. I understand there are layouts where game could possibly make. They just are rare. Besides, with my luck, partners never hold the ideal hand... and often even not his fair share (in this case, 2) of the outstanding HCP.

Bid 1S. Partner is marked with about 2HCP and three or more hearts and likely fewer spades than hearts. What contract would I like to be in, considering this?

Deleted. OP is not open to reason, I see.

I have deleted what I said about suspensions. I was wrong, only discipline and probation, no suspension. My apologies to all.

Experience is sadly something I do not have much of right now. Only 15 months playing bridge and 2♣ hands do not appear all that regularly. So it is nice to be told what to avoid. I also really like the "system" you play but as I am in a fledgling partnership it is far too soon to ask partner to play something other than what he is familiar with. Give it a few months, and I will suggest it to him. Sorry, didn't mean to overload. You can easily start with a simple plan for 2C openings, which is part of SAYC, while you and partner are getting your system worked on. Nice to have new players and new forum posters, welcome. http://web2.acbl.org/documentlibrary/play/...gle%20pages.pdf

Whichever methods you decide to adopt, stay away from any step responses that are based on HCP. One king is usually golden while three jacks typically worthless or of marginal value so counting HCP really does not help. Second consideration is to leave opener as much room as possible to describe his strong hand. A direct 2NT response is usually very bad. It takes away the whole two-level and makes the strong hand dummy when NT becomes the strain. And when NT systems are "on", it tends to wrongside any suit contracts as well while if you for some reason opt for systems "off", the auctions become unmanageable. Also, don't rush to make a positive response in a bad suit. Use the 2D waiting and then introduce your suit next round if it is still necessary. Positive response in a major should be 5+ cards with two of three top honors or three of four top honors. Positive response in a minor 6+ cards, or if only five then extemely good suit. I prefer 2D = GF: promises at least one ace or one king. 2H = bust or no aces or kings 2S = Positive response in spades 2NT = Positive response in hearts 3m = Positive response in the minor And don't forget to agree on followups both for opener and for responder, and on general principles what is forcing, what shows weakness, what shows strength, what is a signoff, and what your various actions show if they interfere.

You can agree what you want in 2/1. Many people have a conventional meaning for 3NT in 1M-3NT, commonly some sort of raise, perhaps 5-card support with one outside card. If it is not conventional, you can play it whatever range you are comfortable with, many play it is 13-15 and 4-3-3-3, giving opener choice of game in NT or the major. Some play 13-15 and 2-3 cards in opener's suit. Some play it showing exactly 2 cards in opener's major. Over 1m opening, same thing. You can agree what ranges you think are best. If you were opposite a random pickup partner, 1m-2N is invitational and 1m-3NT is 13-15. In SAYC (which is *not* the same as SA or Standard American) 1m-2NT is 13-15 and 1m-3NT is 16-18. Whatever you decide, make the jump from 1M or 1m to 3NT as narrowly defined as possible because it takes away so much bidding room.

At least in US, "Flat" is an MP term while "Push" (or "Tie") is an IMP term. I don't know where the term Push originated. Nor do I know what terms are commonly used in other English speaking countries or areas.

Nothing wrong with 4D in the given auction. What was unlucky is that opener judged his 24HCP suit oriented hand to be a 25-26HCP no-trump hand. I would have bid 3C over 2D.

Pass with both. Clear.

2D is a weak two in my system, but I would still open 3D. Third seat favorable, the fourth seat has a good hand, let us not make it easy for him and their side. There is no guarantee that 3D works out best, but it is still better than 2D. Just my opinion.

I didn't vote because what I prefer was not listed in the vote options. Prefer the way it was 1st round, but if an "easy" hand was among the hands, the top score for that should be an 8 or 9 at most while for a hand that requires extremely good judgment or some perfect methods, the top score could be 11 or even 12. For the rules, I would want to add that there must not be 1-3 minute tank between bids.

This was in the New Orleans Motions before the Board Meeting (the meeting already took place but I have no idea if this was on the Agenda there or not, and what was decided). "Item 102-30: Preempt Pre-Alert Elimination Deferred from the Reno, NV Spring 2010 NABC Eliminate the requirement to pre-alert short (5-card weak 2’s and 6-card 3-level preempts) and undisciplined (less than Q high) pre-empts. Replace the pre-alert with an alert upon occurrence. Note: Referred to the Competitions and Conventions Committee to be considered as part of upcoming modifications to the alert procedure. Deferred to the Summer 2010 NABC" This one proposed modification was identified, but does anyone know what the rest of the upcoming changes might include; the text is implying there are more to come. I know, I know, I could contact the ACBL C&CC directly and ask. Or just wait til the powers-to-be have decided.