655321

I selected the multiquote button at the bottom of your post (the button is now highlighted in green), and clicked the 'add reply' button at the bottom of the page, but ...

No, I only see about 5 posts when I do that, perhaps I am being stupid and there is an obvious way to see more than 5, but I haven't yet found it.

Postcount is a bit different, I guess deleted posts no longer count. Former posters han and cherdano have moved down from their 8888 and 5555 posts, and jlall's count no longer includes his first incarnation. We have lost our record 538 users from October 2008. Updating of number of views doesn't seem to be instant any more, not sure yet how it works, yesterday I looked at one post several times and the view count didn't change, even when I was refreshing the browser.

I am sure there are advantages to the new version which I will learn over time. At the moment though, I am used to the old color scheme and still prefer it. Unread posts used to jump out at me, the button next to them was clearly different from the button next to read posts. Now it is not as obvious to me, but perhaps it will become more automatic over time. Agree that the pinned posts appearing at the top of the lists is bad. I think the loss of nested quoting is quite bad, I know we can edit replies and put QUOTE tags on, but if that functionality really has been taken away I don't understand why. Not sure how the new multiquote button works, if I reply directly to a post the (unquoted) text from that post appears in the reply as previously, but clicking multiquote (even in several posts at once) doesn't seem to do anything different, in particular it doesn't quote the posts where I selected multiquote. I use firefox, but haven't yet run into gordontd's problem about unresponsive scripts. Searching, I haven't noticed the improvements, still cannot search for 3 letter terms (e.g. XYZ), and I haven't yet discovered how to find all posts for a user in the new version. In the old version, that worked for posters until they had around 9000 or so posts, so I am curious to see if the new version works even for posters with more than 10000 posts.

If you hold Axxx, and dummy on your left has KQxx, and declarer leads towards the King, you have ducked the Ace not the King, so maybe it is the same when sitting over dummy. (Hmm, 'Review the complete topic' button used to open a small new window, now it opens a new tab for me... annoying, but perhaps there is an option to change it back to a window...)

Partner shouldn't play us for 5 hearts on this auction, this is a standard way to compete with exactly 4 hearts and (probably) longer diamonds. If we had 5 hearts we would know we had at least an eight card fit and wouldn't mess around with diamond bids.

Good problem, I will bid 4♥ but I am torn between bidding 3♥ planning to bid 3NT over partner's 3♠, and just overcalling 4♥. I choose 4♥ because if partner has a weak hand with something like Qxx heart and a singleton club 4♥ doesn't need much more to make (♦J, or diamond finesse, etc).

Agree with the pass because we have a high card in the opponent's suit, disagree with the comment that partner's double was a "let's stop right here" bid.

Enrol me in the 2♥ then 3♦ club.

4♣. Initially I thought we should just bid 4♥ because if I understand the methods partner is limited by not overcalling 2NT with a very good hand and both majors (don't like these many-option overcalling methods BTW) But if partner has AQJx AKxxxx - xxx (which would be a reasonable hand for his bidding to date) 7♥ just needs trumps to break, so I think we should do more than 4♥.

I don't mind 2♠, I agree with karlson that 1NT is both wrongsiding and underbidding. Pass now, but I realise it is possible that partner has made a contextually empathetic cue bid which I don't understand.

Definitely 2NT for me. Usually you will probably be OK whichever rebid you choose. But often 3NT by South is the right contract, and rebidding 2NT is the safest way to get there. In addition you describe the approximate strength and character of your hand to partner, enabling him to make good decisions. It is true that occasionally you will miss a good 6♦, but you also avoid those adventures where partner, after hearing a reverse, gets too high. And game before slam is a good general principle to keep in mind.

First hand I would pass because it seems that with this soft aceless hand we will often have 4 tricks to lose. Still, bidding 4♣ could easily work, perhaps it is cold, perhaps opponents make 3♥ and don't double 4♣ when it is one down, perhaps they take the push to 4♥ and go down... almost convinced myself to bid! Second hand I would always raise to 3♠ immediately.

Flameous there is no progressive squeeze on West in your example. If you pitch a club on the 4th diamond he can do the same, then your hand is squeezed in front of West when the ♣T is cashed.

ONEfer, do you notice any differences between the hand in this post, and the hand in the unrelated thread you linked to? Comparing our holdings in the opponents suit would be a good place to start.

I have snipped most of your resulting remarks (but pretty sure I disagree with every one of your sentences in that post), because I just wanted to highlight this one. Over the years I have come across a number of result merchants and their reasons why partner should have done something different, but this one is new to me.

Pass, but for some reason I don't really hate the double with this hand as much as I do on other similar hands. Here are a couple of other discussions about opener's reopening decision:- http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=36267 http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?showtopic=37895

♥4

Yes, 3♠ then pass seem normal to me too. Of course bidding anything over 4♣ is unbelievably ridiculous, but if I was forced to make a bid at gunpoint I would choose 4♥ not 4♠.

Doblo!

I don't agree with gwnn's first post in this thread.

Then why is there no poll option for 4♠?

I have always played 2 way checkback here.

The Juniors results show a USA 1 team at the top of the leaderboard, and a USA 2 team at the bottom. The participants page only has a USA Red and a USA Blue. I had to go to the USBF pages to discover that USA I is indeed the team with our own rogerclee, jjbrr and kfay!

You need 4 red suit tricks, and not to lose 3 red suit tricks. Really, you want to guess which red suit is 3-3 and play that suit first. Starting with a diamond needs the diamond finesse, but it also need diamonds to be the 3-3 suit, and you still need to guess hearts later. Starting with a heart to the Jack works when East has the ♥AQ and either hearts are 3-3, or hearts are 4-2 but the diamond finesse works. If East has the ♥A and West has the ♥Q, West has to give you something, either the diamond finesse or a heart, so you can use your last entry to play the other red suit. Starting with a heart to the King needs hearts to be the 3-3 suit, and it also needs the diamond finesse, and for one of the hearts to be onside. Starting with a heart to the Jack looks as if it might be best, with the slight extra chance that you can make sometimes even when hearts is not the 3-3 suit, but perhaps there are extra chances I have missed with the other options. (edit) Maybe a heart to the Jack would have been better at trick 2, even after the spades are eliminated West can often lead a 3rd spade, if that gives us an eighth trump trick we may still lose 3 red suit tricks because we are stuck in hand. (another edit) If you start by playing on diamonds (diamond to Queen, diamond Ace, diamond) and it turns out that diamonds are 4-2 but hearts are 3-3, you still have two entries (diamond ruff, trump) to play hearts up and take advantage of AQ of hearts onside, in which case my 'extra chance' for playing a heart to the jack first is no extra chance at all, so which suit you play first might just be a complete guess.