ASkolnick

Depends the purpose: 1♣ If I am just trying to set the tone 2♣ If I play precision, I think you are pretty safe. Pass If I want to bid normally. 3♣ If I play that style of preempts, but I think the outside strength and the 4 card major are big negatives.

I am playing the A♣ to. I have no idea what suit partner would be short in. I think its more likely with a "positional" trump winner and the A Spade, he doubled. RHO is probably void in spades, but partner with A Spades, (KQx,KT9x,KJx etc.) is doubling

It depends on style. If that is a 2♥ opener, is this also a 2♥ Opener? Kxx KQJTxx xxxx x I don't like wide style preempts, but I have no problem playing constructive or destructive preempts.

I think 1N is fine if you are NOT playing 2-1. If you want to say I have a balanced hand and about this values, with all your queens and stuff its fine. If partner doesn't take another call, you should be OK. A forcing NT does not promise a balanced hand in 2/1, so why would you suppress your support? If partner makes another call, you can always bid NT to show a flattish hand with 3 card support.

I would be tempted to raise to 7 with your hand. The only question is if he would do this with long hearts and no AH, but for that he should probably bid blackwood first. Worst possible hand I can see is xx AKQxxx xx xxx and now its at least 50/50 with squeeze possiblities. Your 9 control hand with a fit has at least 6 known tricks, 6 tricks in parnters hand, and 1 probable from either your clubs or one of his fitting Q.

Actually, yes. That is one of the inside jokes in the cartoon "The Simpsons" who are from springfield but they never say from where. The reason is, there is a Springfield in all 50 states of the United States.

OK. You made a 2/1 game force and partner has a 4 loser hand. Using the LTC count (24-4 (his) -7 (yours)). You should make about 13 ticks. Let's assume he is worried about wasted values in clubs. He has no reason to jump. So the auction can go 1♥-2♣ 2♦-2♥ 3♦-3♠ (Your QJ diamonds are huge cards now, AS and no wasted clubs, you no longer have a min) 4♣-4♦ Off to the races. So I don't think it was relative that you started the auction with 2 Clubs, when partner could have kept bidding his hand out. When you show wasted values in clubs, he can give up.

Let's assume, he does not think 1H is forcing. I agree not a good way to play, the chance of leaving the 4th suit in as natural is almost non-existent, so you must have something even if it means, I have a slightly under invitational two suiter.

Depends on what 3H/3S means, I would most likely guess a (31)(54) pattern with between small slam-grand slam values. If he had both minors, he could transfer to one or bid another or make a 2 suited bid.

My favorite strategy telemarketer: Put my 3 year old daughter on the phone. She loves to talk and say things and some gibberish as well. I used to put my son on as well, but now at 6 he is perfectly capable of providing information I don't want to provide. Or if I have the time: I had Jehovah witnesses come to my house, and my goal was not to be able to let them leave for a long time. Talking about peace and love in the bible. I tried to point out that the bible is one of the most violent books out there, at least the old testament.

My agreement with partners are first agreed or last bid suit RKCB. Not necessarily best, but does avoid confusion.

OK. I will stick out my nose here. 1) I don't like it conceding the match in the middle, but if it was done cordially I guess it was OK. It really doesn't affect anyone. 2) No problem with "swinging for the fences" in a knockout match if you are behind. As I always said, if you need to win by 50 in a game to make the playoffs, you should go for 2 every time. This is not unethical behavior. There needs to be a distinguishment between unethical behavior and maybe not best bridge or anti-field actions. Unethical: Hesitating on doubles on-purpose to distinguish between penalty and takeout. Bad Bridge: Bidding to a NT slam on 24 combined HCP. Anti-percentage: Bidding 3NT in your 9-card major suit fit. 3) The legality of it I think must be in question. When after you go for several numbers in a row and you now here one of the players say "I don't feel well", I am quite suspicious. While although it may be true, it seems to be equivalent to my 6-year old son saying "I don't feel well or I'm tired" when he is losing at a board game. I will actually make him play the rest of the game and explain to him that even when you are getting beat, you congratulate and say "good game". The only reason why I question the legality about the exiting in the middle of a session is if he wanted to just "concede" the match, whether the guy was sick or not would not be relative. There should be no punishment because there was no violation of law. However, to say this was good sportsmanship, I find it questionable at best. So, if Blade wants to pan me, he can feel free to do so.

I think a 2 point re-evaluation is a rather large assessment for this hand. I am starting to believe ZARS count is a pretty good evaluation of the hand. And the ZARS count is really not very different from how Ken is assessing it. 1) HCP+Controls (Same evaluation, 6 extra points versus very good controls. 2) Shape (3424) is an OK shape, not a great one. You do have the advantage of if he bids a major, you have good support, but the more length you have in a major, on average, the less he holds of a major. ZAR count gives this 10 ZP which is about average if you only have the "traditional" or semi-traditional NT holdings (4333,4432,5332,4522) fair of (8,10,11,12). 3) Body - I agree that you should evaluate body as well which is not taken in account in ZAR points, but I think saying you have good body I think is overstating it. a) Your "3-pack" is in your short suit. :) An A9 doesn't do much unless you are holding two honors/intermediates with the other hand with it. c) An AT needs another honor/with it. Usually I wind up adding 1/2 point for useful intermediates with the ZAR count as well as deducting a point for short honors. So, I can understand the upgrade of 1 point moving it to a "minimum" NT in evaluation, but moving it to an "intermediate" NT is fooling yourself.

Interesting topic. I don't think I am in favor of gay marriage, but I do believe that a gay couple should have the same protection and rights as any married couple (civil union). I think you may want to keep the distinction. The government has been known to be wishy-washy when it comes to separation of church and state. As I like to point out, it talks about separation of church and state, but on every bill the US government prints it says "In God We Trust". When you go to court, you swear on a bible, etc. So, as much as there is some separation, there is still some puritan law behind the basis. As for the teaching in schools, there was a controversial book in NYC about 5 years back called "Heather has two mommies." While I do believe tolerance of all types of people should be taught, I am not sure that should be part of the curriculum, any more than ebonics should be taught as a language. As in the case of the one person's daughter, you need to make sure that you aren't stepping on one person's right by infringing on another.

I was once a high school math teacher about 5 years ago and when you make a statement like above saying you did not solve for X, I would say "But you just did solve for that equation for X, and here is how. You did the same thing to each side of the equation. Let's go through this step-by-step" 15+.5X=35 "You said we need to figure out just the hourly rate? How did you get to your $20" "I took the $15 away from the $35" "Where did you get the $15 from?" (S)he can show me. -15(15)+.5X = 35-15 .5X = 20 1 hour is .50 Cents, how many hours do you get for a whole buck? 2 hours. How did you figure out 40 hours then. Multiplied 2*20=40. 2(.5X)=2(20) X=40. or simply 15+.5X= 35 -15 -15 Hourly Rate was 20 bucks (35-15) .5X=20 Half buck 1 hour, 1 buck, 2 hours 2(.5X)=20*2 X=40 And you are wrong, this is exactly what algebra is. If anything, it is a much more practical application of algebra then just writing down formulas. For Calculus, it was much more interesting with word problems minimizing surface area and maximizing volume. For Differential Equations, it was much more interesting when we could figure out the time of the murder based on when the body gets cold. So, does this mean if you put a practical use to develop an equation, it now loses what it is s called. I think not. Now, you should also explain that things may not be word problems, but if needed to you could always convert an equation to a word problem to make it more practical. How does one solve for it? I can think of two methods off-hand: Gaussian Elminination or substitution. Is either right? No, just different methods of solving the same equation and yes they are both algebra. So the method of solving for X does not determine if its algebra. However, I am a believer in not "dumbing" down tests or into social promotion at all. But I do believe you can take more than one approach to any problem.

I agree with Dake50. This is a discussion I always get into partner with about "flexible" doubles on odd-shape take-outs. The problem is not with the hand that makes the takeout, it is with the responder's hand type of hand, it could be dangerous to sit. But I sit anyway. Yes, I could miss slam and we also could have 28 points and no game.

I'm glad people know how much experience I have or where I have played. I am not saying double can't work out, and I think it is OK if you decide to double. But to say on what Ken, I and some other people consider a border-line hand. However when you say "How can you possibly bid 2♦?" is preposterous. If you want to say "I feel a double may work out better since it brings all suits into play and my diamonds aren't that good." I don't agree, but I can live with that as a choice. I have played many hands and found off-shape "flexible" doubles (6-4-2-1, 5-5-3-0 (although this probably does not qualify), do not work out very well because partner then tends to penalize when you have a large fit.

I'm sorry, I am with the 2♦ bidders as well. I tend to bid out shape first. As for the people saying, you must be a bad player if you don't is silly. I also agree with Ken, if my 5 card suit, looks like a 4 card suit, I would double, but AJ9xx is a reasonable suit. What would you like me to do with my 9 count and 4 card hearts on the auction, 1♠-X-2♠- I guess a responsive double is OK, but when LHO bids 3S, I have no idea where I stand. If I bid 2D and decide to reopen, that is good. Or now, partner can make a responsive double with the hand and I could bid. Double is always the most "flexible" action it seems, but nobody seems to understand that when the auction gets back to you, you may not be able to catch up.

Silly argument about extra "hot". How does one make coffee? Oh, I know, by boiling water. Didn't they use boiling water/oil as weapons in medieval times to stop intruders. Why? because it hurts. Probably not something you want spilled on you even at 155 degrees or put between your legs. As for the shower, as stated, I test it first. I would not stick my hand in a Lion's mouth, even if his teeth weren't as sharp as the alligators. I would not fold my exersaucer with a child inside, even if there was no label. I am not planning on jumping off a building even if it is only two stories high and I might make it. Do you know why? Because this is what the article means about Common Sense. As for the when you last used an X, it is interesting how the world has changed. I keep thinking to myself how my 1st grade son is now going to do book reports versus the way we did them. I still find it odd that the classroom is in clusters of desks instead of rows. I think algebra is used more often then you think, people don't call it algebra. Algebra really starts in about 1st grade when you have the "Fill in the Box problems" _ 3 + |_| = 7 is no different then 3 + X = 7. Solve for X. Also, how much do I need to charge for a widget to break even producing 1,000 widgets and covering costs of $7,000? Sure, you may not think its algebra, you may use a calculator, Excel spreadsheet or whatever device, but it still is using algebra. and those who want to know (and I'm sure people do) (-B +- SQRT(B^2-4ac))/2a and no, I don't use it at work.

I'll respond to that, why the 8♠? OK. Because while yes it is possible, that a declarer from QT9x may choose to play the T since it is equivalent, we can take an "inverted" restricted choice type position. If the T9 are equivalent, why did declarer play the T? Because it is possible because he did not hold the nine and partner needed to do something to unblock the suit. Sure, it could be from A8x, but you are no worse off then you were before, and you now have possible "additional" information to make your choice of plays. I am not saying I would get it right though.

I would say "Forward going (denying club), I'll tell you later where we belong". 4H may be a better contract against a stiff honor 1-6-3-3 (no club stopped) 1-6-4-2

I read the facts and as for the coffee case, I think the argument stops at She put the hot cofee between her lap. What do we know about hot coffee? Oh, I know. It's HOT! Because of things like this, every cup now has a warning which says Hot coffee is Hot. Or, I have an Foldable Exersaucer (This is a child entertainment toy for kids just first standing which folds together, and there is a warning which states "Do not fold while child is inside") As for the Child Left Behind Act, in principle it is a good idea. It is trying to establish minimum standards for a public school, but I am not sure it necessarily does that. One of two things rates to happen: 1) Teach to the test - You can prepare students for the standardize test, but it will not necessarily be the best way to teach. 2) Dumb down the test - If the test is too hard, too many schools will fail. Therefore, as at least what Kenberg feels about the Maryland test, it doesn't raise the standards it lowers the standards.

I am playing the overcaller for the stiff club honor, but I am sure it is the other way since the question was posed.

I actually think you should return the 8♠, not the 9. This will have the same effect of untangling the suit, but when declarer plays the T♠, not the 9♠, partner may be able to figure out you are unblocking the suit. If you return, the 9♠, I would probably duck.

I have no problem bidding 2C, because I play 1D-1M 2C as forcing for one round. Sure, I give up on the ability to play in exactly 2C when its right, but it solves all this problem about whether partner needs to take another call with 6(5) card major or over take a preference and this way you do not have to jump to show extra strength. Since we open weak NT, our 2-2-(5-4) type hands we can open 1N. Although the minor suit may be superior, it usually does a decent job of preempting the major.