AlternaG

Auction proceeded 4♣-4♥-4N-AP.

No Namyats. 3N should be long, solid (or on the super high end of semi-solid, I guess...) hearts and stoppers/tricks in the minors.

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakqxxhdqjxxckqt9]133|100|Scoring: MP 1♥-1♠ 3N-??[/hv] Sure feels like we're making 6 of something... EDIT: Feel free to move -- didn't meant to post in sayc & 2/1

For those who would bid 4H after making a Bergen raise (that is, those who feel that this is a GF hand, but that Jacoby 2N is not an option due to partner's overexcitement with a better-than-minimal but not omgawesome hand): If you opted to make a (passable) limit raise in this system, I'll suggest that bidding a forcing NT followed by 4H is better. Obviously your partner will draw likely incorrect inferences about your shape, but this line may better describe your values. If you think that this is a limit raise, no two ways about it, obviously you should make a limit raise.

I bid 4♦ at the table, and it went for 500 (and a bottom, in particular). I thought 3♦ was too forward going, and I didn't want to pass with 5c support. Then I couldn't tell if I was resulting when I started questioning the 4♦ bid. Thanks for your comments.

You still have to be careful. As you said, you have 11 winners: 5 spades, 3 hearts, a diamond, and 2 clubs. But you have 3 losers, so you can afford to pitch away Kd on a winner. As mentioned, Q♥, A♣, K♥ pitching K♦. Let's not forget that we still need to get to the board to cash A♥. So, we have to protect against ♠Axx on our right. This is easy: small to the K♠. If the ace pops, or if both show up with a spade, we're fine. Otherwise small to the T♠. Again, if the A♠ pops, we're fine. If T♠ holds, A♥, lest we never get the opportunity again. Edit: Checking out the spots, obviously you could just play two rounds of spades off the board, ducking in hand, then A♥ if they are 3-0 and you haven't seen the A yet.

r/w MPs xx / Qxxx / xxxxx / xx (p)-p-(1♥)-2♦- (p)-??

I see your point. What about something like: [hv=d=s&v=e&s=sxxhxdaqjtxxxcxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] This looks like a 3♦ opener to me. But, is there a case to be made for 4♦ at IMPs?

In (1), partner's 2N shows 5+/5+ in the unbid suits -- not the minors. You choose 5♦. LHO bids 5♥, and RHO bids 6♥. Back to you. In (2), I think I underestimated the value of 4♣, and for me it was a decision between passing and 5♣. I figure I contribute one defensive trick, and partner has at most one trick outside of A♣. I bid 5♣, and we went for 500. This thread got me to thinking about the value of 4m preempts, though, at IMP games. With some distribution going on, it might be hard for opps to hit 4m from a risk-reward point-of-view, so making them make a 4-level decision early may be a pretty good thing. I like 4♣ on (2) now as well. Thanks. In (3), I liked 2 1/2 ♥ as well :D.

[hv=d=e&v=e&s=sh10xxdj9xxxxcajxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♥)-P-(2♣*)-2N (3♠)-?? *GF[/hv] [hv=d=e&v=e&s=sh10xxdj9xxxxcajxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♥)-P-(2♣*)-2N (3♠)-?? *GF[/hv] [hv=d=e&v=e&s=sh10xxdj9xxxxcajxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP (1♥)-P-(2♣*)-2N (3♠)-?? *GF[/hv]

Maybe Han meant "super-6" (as opposed to sub-6 or exactly 6). :)

It's not so surprising that 10-12 is + imps and the others are minus in the "stretch by 1" scenario, since we're balancing the preemptive value of 1N (should be + imps for us) vs. the misleading of partner about our HCP (likely - imps). I don't know what systems people were playing over these NTs, but if I open a 16-18 NT, and points are distributed randomly throughout the other 3 hands, it is more likely that our side has the points for game, prompting a raise by partner, than if I open a 10-12 NT (where P has to have 13-15 of the remaining 28-30, rather than 7-9 of 22-24). I suspect partner says "Eh, we have some points, but not enough for game; let's just play a safe 1N" more often with a 10-12 NT, or transfers and passes at the 2 level or something, and the one point I lied about is less likely to make a difference. Conversely, if partner bids a thin game (you have to, right? It's IMPs!), that fib I told could be devastating. At least these were my first thoughts...

I thought that the site was great. Sure, the building's a little goofy with the circular walkways, but it was convenient to most everything in downtown Detroit via public transportation (people-mover), the hotel was in a beautiful location on the waterfront overlooking Windsor, ON, and there was plenty to do in the hotel besides bridge. Parking was moderately convenient. I can understand the complaint from smokers, though. It takes serious effort to get from the 4th/5th (even 3rd) floor rooms to somewhere that you can have a cigarette; this is almost impossible in a 10 minute break without going into the bathroom for a quick puff and blowing the smoke down the toilet (ah, high school). It is to be expected that Detroit would have lower attendance than SF or LV for obvious reasons. I think it would have made more sense to have the summer NABC in Detroit, when people could walk around the city a little more comfortably (weather), perhaps catch a Tigers game, etc. That said, I thought that things ran fairly well, and that the site was more than adequate.

That would make much more sense. I thought his line was well thought-out and insightful until he hooked the wrong guy :D

Shouldn't RHO be more likely to have a 'real' bid (say 5 points) if he only has Jxxx ♠? Also, just on the count of the hand alone, we expect there to be more of either minor in RHO's hand. I probably play KQ♠, and if LHO shows up with 2 spades, diamond to the king and finesse back. [Also note that this picks up the 4-0 diamond break if RHO has Q9xx, but you can't get to the board to cash your 5th diamond. ::sigh::] Am I way off here?