peachy

Bid 4S and hope that it makes. This hand has gone down in value opposite a heart splinter.

I came a little late, haven't read all of the thread, but striking disqualification clause would be a bad thing to do. I think it would be best not to even ASK or EXPECT TO HEAR the reason a team does not show up for a scheduled match. No show => disqualified. If everyone would leave the politics out of it and stick with the "bridge" and "tournament" facts, it all becomes easy: CoC specify teams must play matches as scheduled. When this does not happen, CoC specify the team who did not show up (regardless of prior notice or not) the team is disqualified from the event. End of problem. Well, the organizers will have some extra work to do and will need to rearrange future matches, but it is doable.

Bonus answer: My guess is he was thinking about sac or not to sac. Clearly the vulnerability and his partner's action indicate sac likely profitable but he held both club honors and figured 5C might not make. Therefore, for the vote question, no play of the trump suit brings home the contract when LHO has KQx and RHO x. So the only hope for making is to have LHO have KQ tight in clubcs.

IMO _X = 10, _P = 4. I am surprised you gave Dbl the rating of 4. Why so much? I meant of course *rating for Pass* - one day I might learn to read what I reply before pressing the Send...

IMO _X = 10, _P = 4. I am surprised you gave Dbl the rating of 4. Why so much?

Diamond ace. Opener set spades as trumps and showed a strong (but not GF) hand. Responder options were Pass, 4S, or a cuebid, rarely 3NT.

I think it shows extras. Otherwise there would have been a 2m overcall instead of a TO Dbl. If "extras" now are "agreed as the default when no other agreements exist" and the 1NT advance was also standard 8--10-11 or so, logically the auction is now gameforcing.

Need to know system before judging. 3D is questionable regardless of system but North still gets at least 80% of the blame. The degree of "bad" in his actions far outweigh any faults in the 3D bid.

This is not true and not standard. SAYC does not have a forcing 1NT. Also, when playing *1NT forcing* and opener holds 2-2 in minors, 2C is the prescribed bid. 2D shows at least 3 cards.

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sa98h5dkj743ckq54&w=skq743h3dat52caj3&e=st652hat86dq8ct86&s=sjhkqj9742d96c972]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] Yes, Phil made a good play of finessing the 9 of hearts on the first round. Next time I'll remember to hesitatte a bit before passing :) Partner leads the King of spades. As declarer wins, dropping the Jack from his hand, you know you probably did the wrong thing here and it's further confirmed when declarer wins the first trump trick with the 9 :) When I passed it appeared reasonable to me. But when you see -12.5 IMPs even on a filed like BBO, it makes you wonder. Only one other 4h opening when I saw it last, most people opening 3h and EW played in 3s. Unfortunate but I still Pass. Not all doubled contracts go down.

Two suits have been bid and raised. I don't consider 3H a cuebid, yet. It is showing support. For RKC purposes, the suit bid and raised, or if two suits bid and raised, the last suit. It is possible that the 4NT bidder knows which suit will be trump - if any - but wants to RKC in hearts anyway, for reasons known to him/her only.

One wheel came off with the 4S. Could happen to anybody on occasion that an 18-count looks like monster, shouldn't look like that in this hand though. The rest of the wheels came off at 6H. After opener bids 4S, 5D by South is mandatory IMO, having the "better" 4H bid and two kings. I often play 2/1, 1NT forcing, and Bergen, and have agreed that 1M-1NT can include a weak hand with 5-card trump support but which has one outside ace or king. I like that method.

3S for me. Dbl is the worst of the available options. First, because partner may leave it in and I really am not looking forward to defending. Second because he may bid 3NT and my hand isn't NT'ish, plus we easily miss 5-3 spade fit, even 5-4 spade fit if his clubs are good and he is balanced. Third, he may bid 4H and I would not know what to do, pass probably. Fourth, he may bid 3H and I don't know what I should do next - we could be in 4-3, or worst case, 3-3 heart fit while having a 5-3 spade fit if I pass, and he could think I am strong one-suited if I now bid spades. I am not so concerned about missing possible diamond fit but even that miss could be bad for us.

My partnerships treat this as if it were a reverse (not a gameforcing jump like 1D-1H-3C) and our agreement about reverse auctions apply. I bid 2NT = lower of 2NT or 4th suit to show bad hand. Second choice is Pass, but I really don't like it.

Making the same mistakes and judgment errors over and over. Seems like I can't make the connection between past bad scores from that mistake to the current similar situation where I ALREADY should know better. As if, by miracle, that decision *THIS TIME* would yield a good score. At least I have identified this stupidity. Now, if only I could get rid of it LOL

I can't vote in this poll because the button I need is missing: I have not and don't intend to contact the ACBL about the e-ban. A session lasts only around 3.5 hours. If the cell-dependent people cannot be without phone that long, they might have trouble traveling long distance by plane. What will they do then - only book flights that have at most 3 hour segments? With very few exceptions, people DO NOT need a cell phone while playing and the dependancy on the phone is largely illusory. I know many who feel "naked" unless the cell is in their hand or they can feel it is in their pocket or at least within sight close-by. I have no problem with that, can happen to anybody :) For work or home, one could inform them ahead of time that all calls will be returned at a certain time (which would be: before, after, or between sessions). Would be interested to know how much of a problem the ban is in other events, such as bridge tournaments in other countries, chess tournaments, and so on. The only drawback I see is the enforcement. Short of body search, I don't see how ACBL intends to enforce the ban. Rules that are un-enforceable, tend to erode respect for that rule and possibly other rules as well.

You don't even have to be expert to respond light, particularly notvul. Keeps the partnership from temptation to open borderline 2C, and also makes life harder for opponents.

At some point, the 7-card spade should be revealed. The sooner the better.

Without any discussion, I would think it shows the minors with poor or no tolerance for hearts.

For me, it says we have game and we might have slam. If I had 4+ hearts, I would bid them at some level so for me to show up with 4+hearts after bidding 3S, it means my hand is suggesting slam.

Gameforce in diamonds, 2S in your system. In your system, if opener does not have shortness (I assume *shortness* really means singleton or void, not xx), what are his systemic bids without shortness? I think shortness in major can be ruled out and I strongly suspect his hand has no singleton club either.

This only seems to be the 'proper' way in the US (and possibly Canada as well?) Everywhere else I've played either writes 4S-1, 4S= (or with a tick symbol), 4S+1; or puts the number of tricks 4S 9, 4S 10, 4S 11. Bridgemates have an option (set globally for the event by the TD) either to enter the number of tricks (9, 10 or 11) or to enter the result (-1, = , +1). I have every expectation that the ACBL will consider adopting BridgeMates within the next 20 years or so... Well, hrothgar might well be disappointed in his expectation, I think. Bridgemates was used in my local sectional tournament in April this year; Sectionals are ACBL events. Based on seeing them used in a sectional, I would venture to guess they are commonly used in higher level tournaments and I am looking forward to Las Vegas NABC where it would surprise me greatly if there weren't Bridgemates in use.

"Nobody" except your partner plays it as 5 hearts, invitational, and not promising diamond support. Claiming that meaning to be "expert standard" is silly. Without agreements, I think most would interpret it as fit showing with [good] hearts on the side.

There is no such thing as an accidental psych. Psychic bid are deliberate gross deviations from agreed system. Misbids, mispulls, or forgetting are not psychs.

I don't know of anyone else who plays that Dbl in this auction is support double. Too high. Responder might have a 6-count with four baby hearts and five diamonds. If responder were strong enough to force, he would have responded up-the-line 1D instead of 1H. He could of course have 5-card heart suit but in that case he could just bid 3H or 4H if Dbl indeed was support.