qwery_hi

Can someone explain why Ace, then finesse the Jack is better than finesse the Jack, then AK, for winning 4 tricks? AFAICS they will win 4 tricks equal number of times.

I'll try to win 3 clubs, 2 diamonds, 2 hearts and 2 spades. After winning the spade, I cash the ace of clubs, diamond back to hand and then lead the 8 of clubs towards the Q.

Agree. If Declarer shotguns T1 from dummy, BIT is greatly mitigated IMO. I completely disagree with this. If you break tempo then you break tempo and the consequences are your own. You can't put the blame on someone else. The laws of bridge specifically permit regulators to mandate a trick one pause. As far as I am aware there are no bridge organizations that so mandate. I have certainly never played in a tournament where there is a regulation mandating a trick one pause. If there is no mandate for a trick one pause then by default normal tempo is what is expected and any break in tempo has normal unauthorized infomation consequences. If I remember right the 2008 Cavendish mandated a 10(or15) s pause at T1 by declarer.

Scratch that - I forgot how to count. I'd go with finessing the Jack and if it loses, playing to drop the 10 the next time. If the Jack wins, we should repeat the finesse

Best I can come up with is low to the Jack, and finesse the 9 the next time for the suit in isolation.

This is one of the lesser factors to think about while preempting. Having a partnership agreement on suit quality and HCP while preempting is more important. Make sure you have an agreement and stick to it. If the suit quality and HCP are ok, I wouldn't mind preempting with a void or a weak 4 card major or a side void.

for a very good discussion of par zero deals, see http://bridge.thomasoandrews.com/deals/parzero/

Right, it's much more fun to post misleading questions in trying to win the post-mortem than it is to learn when rules do and don't apply. Most people know the auction I posted isn't forcing. It's easier to remember a few nonforcing and forcing auctions as examples rather than try to memorize a rule that's a lot more complicated that it's set out to be. When in doubt, I always followed the rule that new suits by unpassed hands were 100% forcing. The rule served me pretty well too.

Yes. If there is one thing to take away from this deal, it is this. before you double a partscore, wait for them to bid a game and then dbl the game instead.

How wrong have I been all this time :blink: I somehow had it in my mind that a new suit by an unpassed hand is 100% forcing. Glad I got that cleared up!

I knew from the minute when they talked about the guy that got out, and zoomed in on the wife's necklace. JC Penny has been advertising that necklace since Halloween. Honestly, I'd rather Adam got me one of those "bad" presents than that necklace that JC Penny is hyping. At least I would then know that he's thinking outside the box rather than blindly following what TV tells him to do. Funny, I guessed it to be a jewellry commercial at the same moment, even though I had no idea abt the necklace. Cynical me!

interesting. so suppose a company that specializes in serving submarine sandwiches fires someone for putting glass shards in with the lettuce, and then, after the person promises to stop doing so, rehires them. Do you think the customers should be oblivious of this employee's previous transgression? this is not quite the same as this situation, as here the OP is not in any way an employee of BBO, but the spirit is similar. I didn't know what a submarine sandwich was before reading this! from (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_sandwiches) A submarine sandwich, also known as a hero, hoagie, grinder, sub, Italian sandwich, po' boy, wedge, zep, or torpedo....

Just wanted to clear up that in Mid chart, 7. A transfer opening bid at the two-level or higher showing a weak bid in the suit being transferred to or a type or types of strong hand. the 2C as strong or a diamond preempt is allowed, as awm pointed out. However, psyching this is not allowed.

Psyching a strong 2♣ opening is prohibited. Is it allowed if 2♣ is 2-way, i.e. a ♦ preempt or a strong opening?

S 100%. I don't think 3♦ promised any defense. Also, after the rdbl, I'd bid 4♦

One really cool thing I liked learning about was the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. I think "In search of Schrodingers Cat" has a nice description. I'd like to read a book about the philosophical implications of quantum mechanics. Anyone read a good book that touches on this?

3 years :D

If neither NS nor EW can make any contract, will the par score of that deal be 0?

That would probably be the ugliest preempt I've seen :) I've read about Marty Bergen, but at least there was a method to his madness.

Fabric of the Cosmos is the best "introduction to modern physics" book I have read. I also recommend "QED" and "The Character of Physical Law "by Feynman.

Must have been a really slow day...

Did I miss something? Wasn't it a link to a NYT article? Did someone accuse somebody of cheating? B)

Here's my try - 2-2 breaks always win 4 tricks, and 3-1 breaks with KQ offside aways lose 2 tricks. So the relevent holdings are KQ9, KQ7, K97 and Q97 and KQ97 onside. So 1. Low to the 8 (if the 7 is played) or the 10 (if the 9 is played) 2. If the 8 loses to the 9, we'll next play the ace hoping for a 2-2 break. 3. If it wins, we repeat the finesse as necessary. This loses when we have KQ tight offside.

Did the ACBL make a definite statement about whether this is alertable? If not, do the players need to ask if the dbl here denies 4 spades if they want to know (irrespective of their spade length)?

Playing at the club yesterday, I was told by an experienced opponent that all doubles which are not penalty should be alerted in the ACBL. Is this correct? If it is correct, I find that my club doesn;t enforce it at all. Should it be enforced, and if I had the director called on me, what would the director look for the auction - 1♣ - p - 1♥ - p 2♥ - p - p - X (not alerted) p - 3♠ - ap 3♠ went off 1 while 3♥ was a make at mps. Thanks.