peachy

That psych would have burned you to crisp.

At my table 3DX was off two, but I don't remember whether due to misplay by them or genius by my partner (I don't recall brilliancy on my part; and I would remember if there was cuz its rare :) )

I don't know what is right but as South, I would not ask anybody to leave. Call TD if there is a concern of some sort. After S didn't, East or West could have. It is certainly an irregularity to ask that somebody leave the table B)

Don't throw it out! Generally it is a good rule but there are ALWAYS hands where no call is an honest description and one must pick the call that is the least misdescription. This is a good example. If you had no splinters at all on the card, then just bid 4H, a balanced powerhouse raise.

It appears partner's singleton is in spades rather diamonds so the hands fit well, one suit is for trumps and the other for side tricks, so all we need is first round controls. There is no option in the list for asking controls. Therefore, my only option is to set trumps (clubs, we have as many or potentially more than hearts) by 4C.

If this were the ACBL, there is a tickbox in the section SPECIAL DOUBLES, for "Min. Offshape T/O" The least the TD should do is enforce they tick that box, since the pair said this is a T/O Double in their methods and this most certainly is a Minimum Offshape Takeout Double. Such doubles are not alertable. However, I would think at some point in time they should be made alertable, and perhaps at national level events that sort of Dbl is so unusual that for that reason alone it should be alerted, also by the Alert Regulation [something that is very unusual or unexpected]. Had it been a club game, there are more of these birds there and it is not so unusual. PS. Only later did I see that this probably was not ACBL.

Despite missing all those trump honors and all those kings, partner STILL was interested in slam. This hand absolutely must continue. What is partner bidding on? Air?

This was a second session I have ever played with this partner. My estimate on possibility of 4 spades in his hand was based on only what I saw in first session, we had not discussed whether 4-card spades is "allowed" for a preemptive raise of minor. I guess with excessive diamond length, he might have that. What's your vote under these circumstances?

He has denied four spades by the 3D call, and I have never seen flyers from this partner, so 4-card spades with him was virtually impossible.

Passing because you have a bad 6 count with 3 small trumps and a QJ in their suit is something I can understand and respect. But passing to find out if partner's overcall was a "lead director in case they play spades or NT" or a better hand makes no sense at all to me, sorry. I am all for "raise partner" and "raise when you have a raise". With three working points in one K, only three card support, balanced hand, and worthless QJxx in their suit made me judge Pass was better and that a raise later - if given the chance and if it were right at that point - would be better because I would know more about the hands then.

I forgot to pick up a hand record last night so I don't have the spots. Think it was Board 12 in the second session of Red Ribbon qualification. You open 1D with this: AQxx-void-AQJxxx-Qxx. 1D (1H) 3D (3H) [3D=preemptive] 3S (P) 4S (P) P (P) Rate my actions please.

Not sure what you call rubbish, I suppose all of it... but perhaps you can elaborate You doubt that he is an expert. He has won 20 North American championships and more than 1000 regionals. He has competed internationally. He has over 53000 masterpoints. This of course does not make him an expert in your eyes, right? Anyway, I respect his opinion more than yours, mine, or the rest of the forum here. You are free to have a different opinion, of course. You doubt that I know whether he is an expert. Yes, I recognize his name, have seen him before, and know about his success You think he didn't say it? Or turn it around and make it a little more of a personal attack toward me: You think I lied?? You are on your own on this one, can't help you Anyway, peace and friends, okay :(

Pass looks obvious to me. That's what I did at the table because at MP's, the auction is not over if I pass. Opener is likely to reopen with something and then I will find out if partner's overcall was a "lead director in case they play spades or NT" or a better hand. Actually, the auction at our table was different so the problem was different for us. Sorry for spoiling the problem. At our table RHO raised diamonds so it was (1D) 1H (2D) and your turn. I passed. The full auction proceeded profitably and we defended 3DX for +500 after 1D -1H -2D - P P - X - P - 2H P - P -3D - X PPP

FYI - I held this hand. My LHO was one of US top experts. When I asked his opinion (yes, I know it is like asking a doctor some medical question...without paying...) he said 5H is automatic in this auction. I also later asked one of my partners and he voted for 5H. In answer to a questions I saw here, double here in our methods is penalty - *of course*, I might add, because I don't even understand how it could be takeout. Takeout to what? And if it is takeout, then we have sorely inadequate methods if we can never punish them.

I am sure you are correct but I do not see the relationship between your statement and the question I posed. Well, you've identified an issue that you seem to be concerned about. I was merely suggesting there is nothing anyone can do about it to satisfy everyone, so it probably isn't worth worrying about. I personally don't want jibberish scribbled all over a CC with things crossed out and printed in margins and everything else. Basically I was echoing the "wtp" camp. But since you didn't see the relationship, I wonder what exactly you're saying in your OP. I interpreted it to mean "If there is no convenient place on your CC to put an agreement, what do you do?" My answer was "The best you can with what you've got." It appears to me that Vampyr asked a Yes/No question: Is it condoned practice to check the least-wrong box rather than write a correct explanation? It's hard to tell whether she's been told "yes" or "no" by these responses. (I haven't been at an actual tournament in long enough that I no longer know what is condoned practice, so I'm not answering either, just trying to clarify the question.) None of the posters here are qualified to answer Vampyr's question. Ask ACBL. My unqualified answer to the question "Which box to tick if there is no box that matches my agreement?" is to write it by hand over one of the boxes. It is unfortunate that there is not enough space, and also unfortunate that a pair with several unusual agreements cannot produce a fully typed card and must finetune it with handwritten scribblings all over the place to each copy printed out. All in all, switching over to a WBF card is not an improvement, IMO!!!! The ACBL card has obvious flaws but it is still easy to read at a glance.

2H>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dbl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>1NT Some problems might be 2H>Dbl>>1NT but this one is a 2H and a lot of ">" characters.

This hand has no problem, just raise hearts, 3H. However, playing same system as you, we don't show a positive suit response with a suit that is missing both A and K of the suit; also, a direct positive response in a suit is 5+ cards long and if in minor, 6+ cards long.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=skj10hk985dq10876c3]133|100|Scoring: MP P P 1♠ 2♥ 4♠ ? [/hv] You are South with this hand. What is your call?

EXACTLY. *If* things happened the way OP described, the Singapore team was in violation of the Conditions of Contest because they came to play unprepared (didn't bother to read the rules, or if they did read them, didn't think the rules would apply to them?). The Singapore team was not disadvantaged because the same rules apply to everyone. My bet is *if* things happened as OP described, Meckwell was not disadvantaged and my other bet is they never claimed they were disadvantaged. Respect the game, respect the rules. And completely agree that none of us posters are in a position to know what happened. Edit: Unless you were there kibitzing and saw and heard it.

There is absolutely nothing ungentlemanly in playing a game by the rules of the game. I am appalled at the shots folks have aimed at Meckwell in this thread. Meckwell did the right thing from any perspective. Any comparison of Vanderbilt environment to playing against lol's at the club is utterly ridiculous.

Edit - superfluous removed. sorry.

1. Competitive. Not much extra strength, considering that the player passed 2D. 2. Competitive without 4-card hearts, but with enough values (ie. full opening hand, for starters, not a light third seater) to survive the 3-level without much risk even opposite a minimum neg double. As to terminology, that varies in different parts of the world, but neither of these doubles is a Penalty or a Takeout, more like "asking partner's opinion" and in the gliding scale between Penalty and Takeout, these are about half-way.

After opener's 3C showed extras, it would be unreasonable not to get to slam after the needed controls have been identified, as they have been here. So Pass over 5D is not a logical alternative. Result stands. Should you conduct a poll, I am confident you will find no passers.

Actually, it is part of the Conditions of Contest, reminder for this requirement appears in the Bulletin every day.

No it's not, according to the OP (she pointed to the area on NT overcalls). Let me try again. Upon inquiry, my partner said "I don't remember/don't know" First, I suggested opponent look it up on the card. Next, I pointed to the NT Overcall area and the tickbox "systems on". Then, I pointed to the area where the systems (that are "on") are listed and that area was filled with "Dbl & 2C". This was also our agreement. I did all the pointing so partner could not see, to avoid giving UI. I get it now! As soon as partner said "I don't know", I should have called the TD, instead of trying to help.