peachy

It most definitely is not standard. In fact, this forum is the first place I have ever seen that even proposes "slow shows" in context of our side doubling their weak two opening. Lebensohl over 1NT interference has a different structure than Lebensohl after we Dbl their weak two opening.

Well, there's an 'other' option in the poll. And I'm playing 2/1. B) Thus I voted 'other' and explained why. WTF? No need to wtf Harald :D. It is clear from the poll options that kgr wants to know what you would bid giving the methods he was playing and your 2S bid is not part of it. Sorry Han, the wtf wasn't serious. But, honestly, why do you think there's an 'other' option. It's hard to see someone bidding anything else than the first four options playing bb79's methods. Still one out of five votes for something else. Maybe the "something else" simply means that AFTER opting for 1NT[forcing] the followup depends on what opener's rebid is. Also, 2/1 and SAYC are not the same so the responses would be different in SAYC and 2/1 so the poster specifying "2/1 or SAYC" is not conducive to meaningful poll. IMO.

Double. I would do it with xxxx hearts too. The diamond fit is a nice landing spot if we don't have a 4-4 heart fit.

The slow route initially "wants to go slow" for reasons only known to the slow route taker - means that strain and level investigation in his opinion needs to continue. It could be because of slam interest, because of stopper worries, or because he is looking into possibility of playing in a major, game or slam. The fast route shows that he is certain that "as far as he is concerned, 3NT is best" and also denies slam interest.

Splinter, hearts are trump. Nothing else makes any sense whatsoever (to me, that is).

Lol Wouldn't KISS dictate just bid game and try to make it, rather than make a game invitation that forces partner to evaluate, and one on which there isn't even complete consensus whether it's forcing or not? I have known since the "beginning of time" that zig-zag auction is forcing (them silent, 1D-1H-2H-3D). Surprised very much to hear jdonn think that there is no consensus whether it is forcing. Is the non-forcing idea something totally new?

The legal terms really can be confusing sometimes. I think it is an irregularity to pass UI but it is not illegal. It is the use of the UI and failure to avoid taking advantage of it that are the infractions = illegal.

Considering that so many *say* they play SAYC while *not* playing SAYC, you are way ahead of the crowd, also by the fact that you actually read what the SAYC booklet says. To have a little improvement on SAYC with a regular partner (who for some reason does not want to play or does not know 2/1...), I would add: - RKC - inverted minors - jumpshifts and jumpraises in competition are weak - Unusual vs. Unusual - Splinter - and define what 1m-2NT and 1m-3NT mean (in the booklet SAYC 2NT is 13-15 and 3NT 16-18, I don't like that)

West must Dbl, clearly. I don't understand Pass at all and my guess is that 99 out of 100 would Dbl. East's Pass in balancing seat is normal. Some some might find a 2H call but my guess is that 3 out of 4 would pass.

Whatever 3H shows, it is accepting game invite. In my partnerships 1S-1NT-2S denies 4-card heart suit and promises 6 or more spades in minimum hand. With 6-4 in S and minor, the minor can by left unbid with minimum hands but never hearts. If there is such a thing as "never" in bridge, exceptions exist.

There will always be people who choose to invent something to cover up, or to blatantly lie. There is not much one can do, except hope that the majority are honest people. Shenanigans like jlall described do happen but just keep the face and name in mind and one day they will be caught in their own lies. So I wouldn't worry about that too much. Let the liars simmer in their own juices and they will face justice one day. Real men [and women] tell the truth and take their lumps from forgets etc. without resorting to shady stories.

Except for the poll results? I toldddddd you! :P BTW I polled my house also and everyone pulled. This all started with me telling Josh he would lose an appeal, and that any poll would have at least a 90 %+ pull rate, and that passing was not an LA. Isn't there something in the laws like the poll had to be done by engaging the bidder's peers. How many of justin's or josh's or the puller's peers pulled?

Even without agreements to contrary, I think this is so obviously penalty that I won't pull. Partner knows what he is doing. Balancing after they open 1NT, esp. when direct Dbl is not penalty, is routinely done with weak hands and long suit because it normally pays. Also, I don't think partner expects two defensive tricks when we make an offensive move. Anyway, just my thoughts. When the penalty is undiscussed and I play with someone whom I don't trust/don't know, I MIGHT pull (they might think HAK are cashing, for one...)

If the meaning of 3C overcall on their 1NT opening is "weak/preemptive" then yes.

Clearly you knew yourself that system is _NOT_ "fairly natural". Why else would you post it in "Non-Natural System Discussion"? WBF regs appear clear to me and define this as HUM, but good luck in your efforts to change the regs.

I would only Pass this as dealer vulneranle 2nd seat and of course any time in 4th seat if nobody opened (this hardly possible to happen). Otherwise, 3C open or overcall looks clear to me.

Gerber banned? I don't believe my eyes... Even if Gerber were not banned, 4C cannot be Gerber. What was the Dbl of the 2C overcall? Many play it as Stayman but did you?

I am probably nor qualified to say what majority plays, nor what "standard" is. If you mean Standardish American or SAYCish, I could opine that standard is definitely Help Suit Game Try = HSGT. However, I have one observation that I would like to consider: You should not use the terms "long suit try" and "help suit game try" interchangeably or connected together because they are not the same. They are two different game tries. In effect there are basically three types of game tries by opener: - short suit - natural = long suit - help suit Long suit try is "natural", showing either the suit or at least a bulky 3-card fragment like KQx. Responder will upgrade length and all honors, whether long or short. Help suit try is "not natural" and typically showing like Jxx or even xxx. Responder will upgrade Ax, Axx, Kx, xx, x, void [all of which help to stop three quick losers in the suit] Short suit can be played in different ways, either opener showing a shortness or asking for one, or asking for specific one, plus there are some two-way trial bids also. Hope this helps.

NMF is not part of SAYC.

Not a takeout double.

Wrong time to copy score when it is your turn to call. He had already taken 20 seconds to think, now he took another however-long-it-took-to-copy-all-the-scores to think about it some more, and then Pass. Copying scores between hands is fine, while dummy probably fine, but not when it is your turn to call! If he was so interested in scores, he could have written them down after each hand. This writing chore while it is your turn to call could easily be interpreted as hiding the fact you needed more time to think about what you wanted to bid/call. Someone should have called the TD while East's housekeeping was in process. However, the reopening Dbl is normal - close to automatic by an originally passed hand - that even if there had been UI from the break of tempo, it should be allowed. The Rdbl so much in error that the result should stand. Just my two cents...

If you expect to beat this team, why psych. If you are psyching, at least psych in a suit you _don't_ have four cards in :unsure:

Thoughtful post. It makes really no difference, of course. Those who don't see there was an error, are none the wiser. Those who do see it, will see it whether commentators ignore it or gently use the "code". What interests me are perhaps speculations as to possible explanations why such a thing happened. Just like the kudos explain the route that possibly led the player to make the brilliant play.

I do wish the commentators were more to the point when there is a clear error. Good or brilliant action gets comments and bravos, bad or inferior goes without any comment or at most with a euphemism like "another choice might have been better". For the benefit of those who might think this error was normal play when there is no comment on it, "Call a spade a spade"!! IMO it is not a disgrace for anyone to make an error, even at high levels of the game. It happens, and that is what often is key factor in who wins. IMO it should not be off-limits for commentators to comment on an error and the commentators IMO should not be gagged, to limit their comments only to great plays. This gagging is unheard of in any other competitive event where there are spectators. Just my two cents...

Pass. This looks like a non-problem, to me. Unless your 1-openings start at 10HCP, this is a minimum hand, nothing to add.