jallerton

Thanks for the replies. I held this hand and bid 3NT, hoping to be able to run the spade suit and protect ♦K. My partner didn't agree with this bid, saying that I ought to have a double diamond stop. He passed holding ♠J8xxx ♥AJ ♦x ♣QJ10xx. With Opener holding Kx in both black suits, I couldn't make 3NT on a diamond lead, whilst 4♠ was makeable.

I think you have misread the auction. South opened 1♦. However, I do agree with your observation that South is more likely than North to hold ♦A!

I agree with your second sentence but the first is not quite true. Some types of UI (long hesitations, alerts, lack of alerts) are easy to identify. On other occasions, UI is probably present but difficult to establish. We might end up ruling 'red fielded misbid' in the EBU on the basis of the auction implying that there is a CPU, whereas in practice what has happened is that a player has detected his partner's unhappiness from UI and has "taken a view".

That may be because we think of great players as being those you have been at the top for decades. So it almost follows that the early successes must have occurred at a relatively young age.

I agree with cutting out irrelevance, redundancy and too much repetition. It makes sense to cut out some of Ton's comments, e.g. when these have not been endorsed by the EBUL&E. It's probably too late to have any input into the content of the 2013 White Book, but I do like the way that the current White Book quotes all still relevant WBFLC minutes by Law number. To find these on the WBFLC website, it seems that the reader has to look up each set of minutes individually, in the hope of finding an "interpretation" of the relevant Law.

This editorial instruction is a bizarre crusade. A better editorial instruction would be to ensure that the White Book provides as much explanation as you consider necessary to clarify how the Laws should be interpreted. Does "shorter" in this context mean fewer lines, fewer words or fewer pages?

So what would you do at the stated vulnerability?

Matchpoints, unfavourable vulnerability.[hv=pc=n&e=saq7hq654dk95ca43&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1d1sp2d(good%20raise)2hp(Stronger%20than%202S)3d]133|200[/hv] Partner would bid 2S on a complete minimum, so pass shows at least some interest in higher things. What is your call on the 2nd round?

I was interested to hear Adam Wildavsky on voice commentary this evening. He has reviewed all ACBL appeals from 2001 onwards and has come to the conclusion that ACBL ACs improve more TD rulings than the other way round. He has kept data on his website to back up his conclusions.

It's not necessary to be in a very experienced partnership. You just need to have discussed your continuations after a 1NT rebid. The main downside of rebidding 1NT is when Responder is 4-4 in the majors and not strong enough to bid on over 1NT. (This is a less frequent loss playing weak NT; playing weak NT opening Helene is right that it's much more important to be able to show your hand type (shape and extra values) immediately.) The downside of bidding 1♠ with the balanced hands is that it makes is harder to find he length of a club fit. I remember watching a USA pair playing in the Bermuda Bowl a few years ago. They bid 1♣-1♥-1♠-3♣-Pass and they were playing in a 3-4 ♣ fit with two balanced hands. Suppose that the auction goes 1♣-1♥-1♠-2♦ (4th suit forcing). If a 2♥ bid now by Opener can be 4=3=3=3, 4=3=2=4, 4=3=1=5 or 4=2=2=5 (or even 4=2=3=4 with no ♦ stop), you've got a lot to unscramble.

Your partner is thinking of switching to strong NT but you are not? Does he play the hands that much worse than you? Playing weak NT, support doubles are not sensible (double is needed to cover some strong NT type hands). Playing strong NT, support doubles are sensible but not a must.

How remote do a team's chances of winning have to be in order to concede? For most people, there's more to life than just bridge, so the answer is not purely based on the odds of being able to pull off an unlikely victory.

It's better to play jump overcalls as constructive here for several reasons. Opener's hand is much better defined (in terms of both distribution and strength) compared with a standard 3+ 1♣ opening bid, for example. Therefore Responder will already have a reasonable idea of what the best contract ins likely to be for his side, and hence pre-empting will have less to gain. Also, Responder will be better placed to judge when to defend. The 2♣ opening has taken out a whole level of our constructive bidding. If RHO opens 1♣, you can usually get away with making a simple overcall on some fairly strong one-suited hands, especially at the 1-level. Partner needs less to keep the bidding open: [(2♣)-2♠-(P)-2NT has a higher minimum than [(1♣)-1♠-(P)-1NT] and the opponents are more likely to come to the rescue. It's useful to be able to bid 3♠ over a 2 ♣ opening to invite partner to bid game on some hands where he would routinely pass a 2♠ overcall.

What's the form of scoring?

Don't worry, they did that as well. See this thread

1. 3♥ is the only LA playing standard transfer methods. 2. 4♥ and 4♦. 3. This auction does not really make sense. To assess the logical altrenatives, I ask myself what I would do if playing behind screens. The answer is that I would go back and review the whole auction to check I haven't got an earlier bid wrong. Depending on the situation, this might cause me to wake up to the meaning of 2NT being conventional. Or it might make me recall that over a natural 2NT opening 3♦ was a game forcing transfer , 3♥ showed 3-card support and that 3NT was a slam try with spade shortage (as I play with one partner). Or, if I am confident about the meaning of the auction up to 4♥, I might just assume that partner has found an extra ace!

Ruff the 3rd diamond with ♠8 and preserve ♠J to take care of the 4th round.

I agree that your suggested system in not optimal, but not about the "super simple" part. Responder will often want to find out about Opener holding 3-card support for Responder's major, but I can't see why it's a good idea for Opener to show three cards in the other major.

In general, you don't want to let the opponents play in 1NT when you know you have a fit your way. I think you need to be a bit more cautious about rasing when you hold only low cards in the trump suit as the trump finesses do not rate to work.

OK, so what do you play Opener's calls to mean after 1♦-P-P-dbl in your system? Perhaps this is because medium strength 2425 shapes are often opened 1NT! I agree that LHO might have a penalty pass, but why do you assume that RHO has a classic take-out double shape? If Opener has a weak NT and the auction starts 1♣-P-P-dbl, the doubler often just has a 'double then bid' (usually 1NT) hand. Although 1♣x is not making, it's often impossible for his partner to pass out 1♣x without taking a huge risk.

The standard parts to the agreement are that Responder normally bids 2♠ over 2♥, 2♣-2♦-2NT shows a particular balanced range and 2♣=2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT shows a different strong balanced range. There's no standard as to which exact range is shown by which sequence. Something to agree with partner. Not common where I play. The whole point of Kokish is to give the partnership more room. One of the sequences stopping in 2NT is game forcing; just use if you are lucky enough to hold 27+ balanced. 2-point ranges are preferable, but it really depends on the rest of your system. How many sequences do you have available to show balanced hands? The closest to standard is "always bid 2♠". Then if Opener has the strong balanced option you know what subsequent bids mean (play whatever you play over a 2NT opener). With some partners I have agreed to play 2NT+ over 2♥ as transfers showind 6+ cards in the next suit up, but there's also a case for using bids to show particular features with 5+ spades and making a statement about heart length.

That was my first instinct too. Leads of this nature are rather less effective after a long trance, so I might have had it on the table before having a chance to reconsider! On reflection, our singleton spade gives us hope that partner may have trump tricks). ♥Q lead (likely to be either brilliant or stupid) is more worth trying if we change a small club into a small spade. Nigel did give 6 marks to a ♥, but he didn't say which one! If you swap round ♦10 and ♥Q in the marking I might agree with you. ♦10 lead is horrible. Are you hoping to hit diamond honours in partner's hand? Give partner as much as AJx(x), with the other ♦honours split, and he won't be congratulating you at the end of the hand.

Yes, 6♥ might make on a blind lead, but some people play in circles where the opening leader is encouraged to inspect his own hand before leading.

Perhaps I should point out that I play that an inverted raise can only have a side 4-card major if Responder has a game force. Opener's most common hand type is a weak NT, so that goes in step 1, which is played as 2-way. With some partners the second option is 18-19 balanced (as Zelandakh suggests - then 1♦-2♦-2NT = unbalanced with 4 hearts). With other partners I play the second option in 2♥ as natural unbalanced, leaving 1♦-2♦-2NT to show the 18-19 balanced hand. After 1♦-2♦-2♥, Responder bids 3♦ or 2NT as invitational opposite a weak NT, or anything else as a game force (step 1 being a neutral relay) With an unbalanced hand, Opener shows a second suit. Over this, Responder returns to 3♦ with a minimum or bids step 1 or 2NT to invite Opener to pattern out or show strength [can opt to use a formal relay structure here]. Why? If I knew 4th hand was about to overcall 2♠ or 3♣, I'd much prefer to have shown invitational or better with 4-card ♦ support than to have shown responding values with 4+ hearts.

I thought someone might say that! It's not very scientific but, as a practical matter, most very good hands for hearts will have 4-card ♥ support and will have broken the transfer on the previous round. Meanwhile, most very bad hands for hearts will be those with values stuffed in the black suits; these hands are usually best off hiding the 3-card support and bidding a natural and discouraging 4NT. If, exceptionally, Opener has a hand with 3-card support with all working cards, he can always jump to 5♥.