jmcw

Yes it is a Texas transfer for me too.

Partner, likely has nothing so you really ought to pass. Agree that you should have overcalled at your first turn. As it is ,you are likely to get very few matchpoints defending 2♦, if that is your view then bidding anything is better than a pass. More than likely the ops are headed higher so just pass.

Mostly agree with earlier posters, I like the auction. Some might quibble with North's evaluation. In spite of only 18 points he has 2 "10's" and a pretty good ♠ suit, a case can be made for opening 2NT, but, as I said, I pretty much agree with the given auction.

Opener is forced to reply, a non jump rebid in a lower ranking suit has a fairly wide range perhaps 11+ to 16 depending on your style. Typically, responder will need about 10 or 11 points and at least a 4 card fit to invite. I would raise to 3♥ on something like: Kx Axxxx xxxx x or Kx Kxxx AJx xxxx but pass 2♥ on xx QJxx KJx Kxxx.

Agree with MrAce. North has ♥ and more ♥. Bid 4♥

I did not address my earlier post to you, nor would I presume to tell you anything. I don't know you! Draw whatever conclusion you wish from the examples you attached. However, it might be more helpful if you were to provide a possible explaination for the divergence in play. In my earlier post I offered one possible explaination, Fred has provide another (thankyou).

I share your sentiments above, I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to change their evaluation methods. I have been using KnR evaluator for quite some time, I would say, it offers a more refined evaluation than the basic 4/3/2/1 count. Using the example hand: AQxx Kxx KQJ Kxx = 17.00 now make the ♣K the ♠K AKQxx Kxx KQJ xx = 18.70 This is quite a stunning difference almost 2 full points. Now, lets give responder xx JTx xxx AQTxx = 8.35 make a small ♠ a small♦ x JTx xxxx AQTxx = 9.35 If we added the 2 weaker hands together we get 25.35 KnR both stronger hands 28.05. In spite of the almost 3 point difference, I would submit, that, the weaker hands offer, at least, as good a chance to make game. The key ofcourse is the fit or lack thereof. Now, KnR evaluates in isolation, taking no stock of the potential fit that may exist.

Hmmm. Looks like the Board numbers are different, and the player position seems to vary. In some cases there are 2 players and in others only 1. Not sure if there is identical duplication or not. Perhaps you can provide an easier case?

Really!, I find that quite unbelievable. It is precisely the subtle spotting difference that may lead GIB to conclude an alternative defence, which is exactly how you preserve the level playing field. For a robot to make a "mistake" it would have to produce a different result when the data imputs are reproduced and repeated exactly. Making bad plays or bids are not mistakes for a robot, but rather, the limit of expertise to which GIB has been programmed.

I could not find an identical case in your link! The bidding is the same but, during play the human spots cards diverge, hence a different result.

Robots provide a level playing field. All participants are constrained to use the same bidding system, and will be subjected to the same unwavering level of defense and play. If the robot does something stupid or brilliant then all players will suffer or gain equally. The robot never gets pissed and will always produce identical bids and play if the human participant also produces the same bid and play (duplicatation). They also provide the fastest and probably easiest was for Masterpoint nuts to accumulate huge quantities, thereby making them appear to be better players.

Re-reading the posts leaves me wondering why you believe previous comments indicated this was a "good 18". Seems to me just about everyone regards this as an average 18 at best, and many are favoring about 17, hence the votes favoring a 1NT opening bid. To your point of automaticalling downgrading all 4333 patterns. I for one regard this as a very speculative strategy!. Without knowledge of the potential hand pattern that your patner is likely to have, how can one possibly discount the potential of a likely fit! For example: Which would you rather play?, a 5332 opposite a 2335 or a 4333 opposite a 2335?, surely you would agree that playing NT with a 5/3 minor suit fit is likely to produce more tricks than playing a 5/2 fit, especially when the long suit is contained within the weaker hand, where entries will be at a premium. Indeed, I'm prepared to speculate a bit further. If NT is a likely final contract, then a 4333 pattern should NOT be downgraded unless all potential for an 8 card can be eliminated. Since the hand contains 18 HCP and a somewhat average collection of controls and suit quality, then no downgrading is warranted for an opening bid.

Was 2NT considered?, or just an oversight on your post?. Can 2NT ever be right here?, if so what should it show?

If you habitually downgrade based on shape, spot cards, and soft/hard honors then presumably you will also upgrade when you hold a good 14, effectively your 15/17 Nt range is 14+/18-. I for one question the wisdom of this practice, I would like to hear from partner before I start downgrading. If you open this hand 1♣ and partner responses 1 of anything does that not indicate that your honor(s) within that suit should be upgraded?. Besides, if you open 1NT and partner passes with a hand that makes 3 don't you run the risk of playing the balance of the set with a pissed partner. I agree this is a less than a perfect 18 count, but I'm opening 1♣ and rebidding 2NT opposite a red suit response, this satisfies my agreements and I expect the field will be making the same call.

Thanks Phil and inquiry

I play 12-14 with 1 partner of modest bridge ability. (he is uncomfortable with strong) He insists on rebidding 2NT over a 1NT response with 15/17 and 3NT with 18/19 when a minor OR Major is opened, I do not like this and would hearitly support the other posters who suggest rebidding the better minor over a forcing NT. Some would say playing a weak NT has the beneficial effect of pre=empting the opponents. I think this is a false claim! It may be true in some cases, but, it is also true that when opening 1 minor with 15/17 points the opponents can just as easily overcall because the hand was NOT opened a strong NT. So a net push IMO Additionally, I would never agree to play weak NT unless a solid agreement is in place to handle interference. I would reccommend modified SWINE or a DONT variation.

DBL>>2C 2♠>>2NT 3♣>>?? likely 3N AP

A negative free bid was not an option. 2 of a new suit would show 10+ and be F1. The double showed a minimum of about 8 with no upper limit if balanced.

I need some help. How to I export a deal from BBO to my computer or this forum? Thanks

Your point makes sense to me..at least to a point. A 2♦ rebid on a 4 card suit runs the considerable risk of missing a much better Major suit fit. If West holds a dub♦ and a 5 card Major should he pull?. Opener could have 6♦ and a stiff in the Major!

There is no basis for an adjusted score since the play of a small ♠ at trick 2 is the percentage play. A procedural penalty seems wrong to me, since it is far from clear that South's motives were intended as devious. I understand some may consider South's motive could be an attempt to deceive, but if I were the director I would be guided by my knowledge of the player in question. If I'm not mistaken, the opponent said he had "impeccable ethics" thats good enough for me.

Are you suggesting this action versus 3NT or other strains?. What if they stop in 1NT?, or 2♥, possibly even 2 minor?

I was thinking much the same when this had came up at the local club. Bidding either red suit runs the significant risk of missing our best fit. On the other hand 2NT is not ideal on the given ♣ stopper, but on balance, I thought the least of evils. Is there agreement that a 2NT range is 12+/14 and that the detractors rejected solely on the dubious stopper?

Thank you for editing the post. Clearly, I was the only numbskull who couldn't figure out the hands had simply been reversed. I would bid 2♦, the alternatives do not appeal. West has backed himself into a hole by not DBL at his first turn. I question whether passing, hoping for a juicy penalty is the best strategy here? Does it effectively let the opponents off the hook!