jmcw

I am not responding to Rosenberg's post here, rather to the OP. I don't understand your comment: How can "you have UI about MY ♠ support"? What I do have is UI because my partner has failed to alert, has he forgotten our agreement?, nodded off?, maybe he understood the bid as Drury and just didn't alert!. Your ethical responsibility in this scenerio is to bid as you would normally bid if partner HAD alerted. In this case he passed over the opponents 2♥ overcall, so what does that pass show in your agreements?. Think about it, he could have called 1. Pass 2. Double 3. Bid 2♠ 4. New suit. 5. etc In my agreements, his pass indicates a minimum hand, 2♠ would have been sub minimum. Ergo, I just sign off in 4♠, making the bid I would make opposite a minimum.

Assume partner has alerted and understood your bid. 1. What does his pass show over 2H (for me 2S would be a sub-minimum). I rate the hand a GF opposite just about any opening bid and would probably just bid 4♠, (if P pass was showing a minimum). 2. 2♠ no reason to go higher. 3. It does seem logical, but not my choice. 4. I would always bid 4♠ and I see no ethical reason to change that. FWIW my 2 cents. Give a PP for failure to alert in addition to any adjustments that may be forthcoming.

With AK♣ it seems a bit of a stretch to assume partner is offering a choice of slams. 5♣ would show a control, so what's left? shortness?, that's my pick. AKxxx AKx AQxxx x But, OTOH could be be AQx A AQx QJTxxx

It's hand like these that produce -800. Iffy suit, minimal values, a passed partner and red vs white. How many warnigs do you need to pass?

Thank you very much. Exactly what I needed. Cheers

If some kind soul could please sim. Thankyou [hv=pc=n&n=s952hkj76d965ckqj]133|100[/hv] South hand will be: 1. 15/17 HCP with 5♥ and any 332 2. 15/17 HCP with 5♥ and any 431 I need to find the average number of tricks taken playing ♥ and the average in a NT contract, under conditions 1 and 2 I get a beer if the difference is more than 1 :rolleyes:

No question in my mind it will be a high honour, likely not the ace. Toss up Q or K, slight edge to Q

This article http://www.columbia.bridge-club.org/node/1192 by Mike Flader seems to provide exception to your reply. ♠K ♥QJxx ♦AKxx ♣KTxx. I think many of us would judge 1NT to be a valid "legal" opening bid. Flader's article muddies the waters by stating that judgement "justifies" 1NT to include unbalanced patterns. So, where does this leave us? Is it now up to a director to "rule" on the wisdom of their judgement?.

Mr.C wants to simplify bidding. It's really quite straight forward he explains to his multiple partners All minimum hands 12-14 are opened 1 suit and make a minimum rebid. All strong hands 18-19 make a jump rebid of somekind (reverse, jump shift etc.) All 20+ hand are opened 2NT or 2♣. With 15/17 open 1NT. On board 4 his partner picks up. [hv=pc=n&n=sak32hqt987dak2c2]133|100[/hv] Later on our superstar gets dealt [hv=pc=n&n=s2haq32d2cakq5432]133|100[/hv] And on board 22 he gets yet another opportunity [hv=pc=n&n=s2hkt2dkqjtcaqj32]133|100[/hv] All were opened 1NT. After the game our Director is assailed by 3 disgruntled players claiming that this "agreement" is illegal and should not be allowed. 1 guy is especially pissed claiming he misdefended(misinterpreting a count signal)............ My question is 2 parts. 1. Does ACBL regulation "legalize" this agreement. If yes, does Mr.C have to announce or pre-alert. 2. Does the Director have the authority to "bar" Mr.C from continuing this practice. If yes, then how might that restriction be framed and enforced. Just so we are clear here. My question is directed toward the "legality" of their 1NT agreement. Board 4 (the first example was pass at 1NT, so their 1NT is not forcing

1♠ is 4th suit forcing GF 2♠ is a jump rebid natural and GF Whats the difference? 4SF typically denies 4spades and may be starting a slammish sequence.

In todays vugraph Can vs Mon the commentators briefly discussed switching the range of a 2NT opener to show 22/23, 20/21 would open 2♣. Never heard of this before! comments?

Your suggested line seems to be the option taken by my partners on the weekend. Unforuneately, they lost 2 tricks in each Major. RHM's line was the option I suggested, hence the post.

Ten from lefty, and the 3

[hv=pc=n&s=sa65hat9d432cakj3&n=sj98742hk876da65c&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1np2cp2dp4hp4sppp]266|200[/hv] IMPs Small ♦ lead

I didn't include 2NT (g/b) because we don't have that agreement. However, your point is well taken.

[hv=pc=n&s=sjhj63dkj7caqt987&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=1cp1h2s]133|200[/hv] My partner and I disagree on the best action here, so good advice may help us out! MP's white versus red. I expect some (maybe many) might suggest a pass is prudent. However, if you are going to bid would you support X? and if so why?

A few months (March I think) ago Fred posted a play problem in 7NT. Would some kind person please provide the link. Thanks

haven't come across a 4333 that was remotely close to an upgrade. you should follow system unless you have a compelling reason not to, so this is an easy 1♣..

My 2 cents. Don't understand 2♠ 3♦ = 10 X = 8 2♥ = 4 2♠ =2

I would bid 4♠. Double has a number of ways to win. Partner might pass for a juicy penalty. We might get to a minor game or slam when 4♠ goes down. Is this the hand for it?. It may well be, If P has something like x xxx Qxxxx AQxx Problem is I dont want to miss 4♠ opposite xxx xxx xx AQxxx 4♠ feels like the % call.

I play with a couple of partners 1♣ - 2♦ 1♦ - 3♣ Showing no Major, 4+ in openers minor and around 6/9 points. Seems to me I should switch the meaning for the 2♦ bid 1♣ - 2NT to show this. Making it more difficult for the ops to show their Major. Then 1♣ - 2♦ can replace 1♣ - 2NT.

1) I have long thought this a good idea. I would love to see a televised league playing for real money. I think it would do wonders to promote the game. 2) Sounds great on paper, but is it doable.... 3) Nah, we might still be playing Goren 4) My experience with TD's is mainly at the sectional and regional level....they IMO are not sufficiently qualified.

I would X 1/2/3/4 ♥ No other choice seems good

I play Texas thru 3♣ also. So 4♦ is Stayman and 4M natural.

I would open a minimum (up to 16) 4-5 minors 1♦ planning a rebid of 2♣. If 17+ I would open 1♣ planning a reverse to 2♦. An intervening bid and X does not change anything, and I have no reason to expect partner to have ♦ for his X. X shows ♥. Perhaps, someone would care to post some examples of minimums that would bid this way.