peachy

This makes no difference - new partner, old partner, imps, mps. I agree that your partner has to do something and Dbl is the best option this time.

I don't want to defend with this until it is 7CX. 6C = pick a slam. Maybe some competent bidding theorist could explain what the difference is between 5NT and 6C, they both ask partner to pick a slam as far as I understand.

I have to try once, something on the 5-level. Probably just 5H. I can't afford to bid 4S, partner might be misled about my heart length.

1S-1NT-2NT is the same as 1H-1S-2NT. It is not forcing (18-19 if playing 15-17 NT opening) but in reality seldom passed. I suppose one could agree it is forcing but I haven't seen that treatment.

(2H) X = takeout (2H) X (3C) P (P) X = penalty suggestion with extra values I would have a lots of questions to those who suggest to play (1H) X (1S) X that the last X is takeout. The first question being : Your are kidding, right?

I think you are overly concerned about what responder. He doesn't need to know what sort of hand opener has. Be more concerned what responder can TELL. Opener is in charge, unless he rebids 2NT or 3NT - after which responder is in charge. As to what constitutes a negative and what constitutes a positive, the exact limits are up to partnership agreement. I follow a common agreement which is: 2D = positive (at least one A or K) 2H = negative (no A, no K, and doesn't matter how many quacks)

This is a SAYC and 2/1 forum. In SAYC, 3C is double negative. If you don't have a direct negative or a second round bid to show negative, then the meaning of 3C depends on what a direct 3C would be. Whatever 3C is, it denies 3+ card heart support. New suit by opener is natural with reluctance to bid NT or rebid hearts (likely because the 4th suit is uncontrolled or because opener thinks we have slam somewhere). Difficult to grope in the dark without agreements but when there are no agreements, assume natural.

One level opening with this would be going too far. Open 2C, rebid 2NT.

Long time ago I heard of a formula from someone I consider respectable, about when to leave this in: Add number trumps (4) to number of TRUMP tricks (1 or 2) to Level (2) and if sum is 9 or higher, leave in. Here the sum would be 7 or 8 so leaving in by that formula would not be right. I might still do it.

IMO, Penalty Double and Equal-Hand Double are not the same. Penalty Dbl is left in routinely, with nearly no exceptions.

Of course, no problem with private functions or parties.

ACBL regulations really have nothing to do with BBO - unless it was an ACBL tournament on BBO. PS. I see that helene already said that. Sorry

You have a limit raise in hearts. In SAYC, if you have a limit raise, you make it. Your first bid should have been 3♥. This is not a limit raise in H. 3H would show a 4th H. In SAYC, it is a limit raise (for better or for worse). It would not be a limit raise for me, but I don't play SAYC.

Just counting HCP, this hand is a balanced or semi-balanced 19HCP, so 1S-1NT-2NT is technically/systemically correct, the 2NT showing 18-19 balanced. However, the hand is a control rich 19 with a nice 5-card suit for tricks and everything under control so I would bid 3D, upgrading.

Why should you care?

Thanks, I knew it was there somewhere.

In another BBO Forum, I have argued that it is illegal to manipulate the deals in any way, against a suggestion that it would be good for bridge to redistribute HCP at or after machine dealing or changing something in the dealing machine so that both sides get them maybe evenly, or manually adjusting the hands after dealing. Forgive my ignorance of terms etc. but I hope you understand what I am saying. I tried to look up which law or laws specifically forbid this. The laws do not discuss dealing by machine at all.

2D was just a SAYC 2/1 bid but 3C created gameforce. 3H is not the forcing call, it was the 3C that promised neither side will stop below game. With 3-card support and limit raise, responder should bid 4H and leave the 3H bid for either false preference with weak hand, or, 3 or more card support and slam potential.

Whether what you say is true or not (benefit in competitive bridge), any tampering with the deals is against the Laws of Duplicate Bridge. That particular part of the Law is likely to never get changed so IMO we should all drop our dreams of doing it in real competition. And if anyone has actually done it, I'm hoping it was done out of ignorance of the laws.

1) Pass. 3) Neither opp has all three aces unless they also have 4-card hearts because they might have doubled 1H or 1NT. Since they started pulling trump, I will draw two more and then go after diamonds, blessed with the 109 instead of smaller spots. If all goes well, losing 2 diamonds and a spade. But I might go down...

I don't know if there is a mainstream meaning. This is a good topic! Without discussion with an adv or better player from my neck of the woods, I would assume 3C by opener denies a major so it is looking for non-major contracts unless neg.doubler bids a major (which then shows 5+ cards and less than 10HCP; with more than 10HCP he would have bid the 5-card suit). Often cuebid of their suit asks for stopper or forces to game. This auction IMO is a logical exception from that when we are still searching for strain. Also, shows how profitable it is to overcall 2C when they open 1D because "nobody" knows how to deal with various hands after that.

This hand falls in a crack in whatever the system is. I would pass and hope nobody doubles. If doubling begins, I might bid 3C, but then when partner corrects to 3D, we are deeper in the mud than we were the round before.

Masterpoints exist in most if not all national organizations and also the WBF. I said nothing about ACBL and did not intend my comments that way. What is this? http://www.aebridge.com/aebdynamic/dyncont...asp?submenu=314 Respect for the game requires that the rules of the game are followed; unless it is a private function for whatever purpose, in which case manipulating the deals is fine, but that is a no-no in real bridge. The Laws are the same everywhere (with one or too optional rules to choose among them). The are not ACBL or any country-specific.

Disagree with any attempt to manipulate the hands. Besides, it is against the rules of the game wherethe rules say the hands are to be random. But as said in another response here, cooked deals are fine in a private game were no masterpoints are awarded.

plus specifically explained in Law to be not bridge. Cooking the deals no matter how well-intended, is not lawful. Holiday fun fun and goulashes can be fun but those are not "real" bridge. Tournaments are rea, they award masterpoints or whatever, and the hands at a tournament must conform to the laws.