peachy

clear 1NT for me. 1 point light, but other bids are worse and more misleading, IMO.

IMPs, All vul. Dealer West [who passes] North AKQ103 Q73 v KQ964 1S - 2H 3C - 3S ? 3C shows some extras OR very shapely. Default minimum hands would rebid 2S which does not promise any suit quality or extra length, or 2NT if both unbids stopped. Question 1: What is the difference between 3S and 4S calls for responder's second bid, in your opinion? Question 2: What do you bid now? PS. I don't know how to set up a poll or insert a hand diagram.

3H. Forcing for one round and at this level a free bid is virtually gameforcing. Negative Double, followed by a 3H bid, shows 5+ hearts in a hand not strong enough to make a direct 3H call. Speaking of negative doubles: a negative double does not promise the "unbid suits", it promises the "unbid major". The only time negative double promises both unbid suits is 1C (1D) Dbl. Of course other agreements can be made but I think what I play is what one might call modern standard.

I like 2C. Next will support hearts and expect we look for slam. Partner knows to upgrade club Q if he has it and knows we will have a suit for side tricks. Splinter isn't really "wrong" but I like to splinter when I know what I will do after partner signs off after I have splintered. Here, I really don't know if I should try once more or Pass.

I don't know of a Rule of 15 (what is it?) that affects how the Rule of 20 is applied. Lots of people tack on "negatives" and "positives" to the Rule of 20 and give the hand another look instead of blindly using Rule of 20 for borderline hands that do not have 13HCP. Having majors is a "positive". Other "positive factors" include having quick tricks, having all points in your long suits, having a singleton or a void, maybe tens-nines to stuff up suits, and so on. The "negative factors" include having no major suits, having soft honors, having isolated honors, having bad suits (often goes together with isolated honors) etc. I am not an authority on Bergen Rule of 20 but have used it successfully, with adjustments.

I don't play your methods. In my book, 2H is showing 5-card hearts (hand that has four card hearts would Dbl 1H). Apparently 2h here was intended as forcing "not-hearts"because there is no other way to explain 3D and 5C. The wheels have come off, on both ends. Sorry.

Windfalls come to you in many other forms like bad declarer play, bad defense, bad bidding, or revoke, by opponents. This is just one of them: bad claim. The TD follows the rules and resolves doubtful points in favor of the NOS. I find it doubtful whether declarer knew the trumps were not all drawn or that the last trump was not a winner. Feelings aside, I find this an easy ruling. Agree it is a windfall to the NOS, but that is a core concept of the game: errors cost and the benefit goes to the opponents.

I think 3S was fine. Some posters think it was an overbid but I think it is a limit raise, the singleton heart providing the missing 2 or 3 "points" in addition to an ace and a king and 4 trumps. 2S would have been a severe underbid. Now 4S. Might have 4S last round, but if 3NT forces responder to cuebid, then 4D it is.

All else aside, East has no right to admonish the opponent(s) of misinformation or of anything else. If there was a problem, he should have called the director. And yes, there was a problem if the explanation was 22-25, and it was not corrected before opening lead was made. If he had explained 32-35, the joke would have been obvious...

Clear 2S. In competition, no particular extras are promised, just 4-card support and sufficient hand otherwise that we shouldn't be going for a number. But this hand has slight extras anyway so even those who think they "have bid their hand" might act.

Without any agreements covering this auction, it is penalty (holding opener's suit and a full opener or more)

South would have a difficult rebid problem in weak nt system if partner responded 1S, so 1NT was ok. Even without a rebid problem, some 4-4-4-1 hands with singleton honor are best described by 1NT (depends on what the suits are or look like). North made a bad bid.

4H. With halfway worthless club honors and otherwise aceless, I am not interested in slam. Partner already knows I don't have three card hearts so this should easily be understood as suggestion of final contract with honor doubleton. If this does not get passed, partner probably has enough for slam opposite almost anything I can have for a 1N opening, and there we go.

Not easy. Tough between 2S and 3S.

The 2NT Lebensohl was a mistake, South has too much and needs to bid 3C. I don't like 3S either, not strong enough = no tricks in sight opposite partner who has promised 0-7HCP (even if it is 0-8, no matter).

Bidding was fine until 3S. I agree with South's 2D, the first priority in 2/1 where 2C is 100% GF is for opener to show if he holds 5+ diamonds. 3C was fine. 3S was fine. Over 3S responder could bid 4S and opener should know it is only three cards and obvious dislike of NT. Difficult hand but the 6C bid was badly judged.

I want to go as safe as possible and let declarer do his own work. Dummy will have no values except three card (or longer) spade support; otherwise he would have bid 3S, I assume. Therefore underleading either king is very risky not knowing which Q if any my partner might hold. At least leading diamonds I will be likely to find partner with either the ten or the Q. It seems impossible for opener to be missing all side kings so I think diamond is the safest.

Playing Walsh, opener can have one or both major suits and 1NT just shows a balanced minimum hand. Just saying this to confirm what I think is Walsh in this context. Responder bids naturally, a major suit is a suit and is forcing, normally gameforcing because the 1D response would not have been made unless gameforcing OR responder was going to bid diamonds until the cows came home. Or, responder planned to pass opener's 1NT. I am under the impression that this *is* standard in Walsh, but who knows...

Unexpected 3H bid. Must be a strange hand, otherwise there is no justification to bid 3H with only 3-card support. Maybe opener mistakenly made support double with four pieces? If not, he must have a singleton somewhere and long clubs.

I have never inserted a hand in a post, nor started a topic. Nor set up a poll. But here goes anyway, please comment on auction in 2/1 system, although system does not have much to do with the judgments IMO. Apparently it was played only by us as the hand did not show in the "My hands" list so I am including only the spots that I remember for sure. IMPs, N dealer, NV, opponents silent. Q98 void AJxx AQJxxx A3 KQ10xx Q6xx 8x 1C-1H 2C-2D 3D PPP Is this the contract you want to be in? If not, how would you have bid the hand using standard methods? How many chickens were at the table [opponents not included :rolleyes:]

Have you emailed BBO about this pair, with examples of hands? If not, do it. Posting at the forum is definitely the wrong place, but at least you had no names mentioned. I think some of the examples speak quite loudly and BBO should take a serious look at this pair. He already replied to Fred, saying that he had reported them to abuse. Yes, you are right. Somehow I did not see those posts before.

If NMF is in the system, then 3H is invite with 5-5 and forcing hands go through the NMF first. Here responder should have engaged an invitational sequence, but if they played SAYC or the like, there is no such animal existing EXCEPT responder's new suit which opener should not have passed unless they had specifically agreed that 2H in that auction is Pass or correct. If they had checkback in system, then opener can pass 2 H because responder has denied invitational or better hand with the 2H bid (except that THIS responder did have an invit hand IMO).

Have you emailed BBO about this pair, with examples of hands? If not, do it. Posting at the forum is definitely the wrong place, but at least you had no names mentioned. I think some of the examples speak quite loudly and BBO should take a serious look at this pair.

There are different styles and agreements. There are even some people who think 1D-2C is not a GF when playing 2/1 (I am not one of them!) and some who have agreed to play that way. 1D-2C is a difficult auction as it is, and despite this start, our best fit may still be in a major suit which is why it is unwise to go jumping. My structure for opener's rebids are easy :blink: - 2D shows 5 or more diamonds and that is opener's primary job to tell (whether has five or more diamonds). Since GF is on, I would not jump unless I insist that diamonds are the agreed trump NOW. - 2M shows a suit and does not promise extras (denies 5-card diamonds) - 2NT is either 12-14 or 18+ (denies 4-card major, 5-card diamonds and 4-card clubs) - 3C shows 4 card support (denies 4-card major and 5 card diamonds)

They have ESP or other means in use to find that lead. From bridge point of view, I can find no logic to support a club lead. If someone else can, help out!