mich-b

PASS. Sometimes we can make game, but by bidding 3♣ we will go down too many times, until we reach a makeable game.

While people who double directly are not? B)

3♦ - 5-5 GF. Some people play direct 3♦ as invitational, and bid 2♦4sf and 3♦ on the next round to show a GF 5-5. We prefer to use that sequence as "5th suit forcing = genral force" with a hand like : Qxx AKJxx xxx Kx 1♣-1♥ 1♠-2♦ 3♣-3♦

1♠. When I try Double on hands like this (shapely and light), my partners inevitably bid (a lot of..) notrumps. :unsure:

2♠, because this assures you of playing in (at least) 7 card fit. If you bid 2♥ , pd will pass with minimum 5143, and you will find yourself in the undesirable situation of declaring a suit contract, with the defense having more trumps.

Open 1NT. And if for some reason you didn't, rebid 2♣.

Double. Looks (to me) a reasonable combination of being active (rather than passing), and safety (since it gives up options to find reasonable fit in 3 suits, rather than one).

My team (National Open Team) may be interested in taking part in team events in Europe (or possibly elsewhere) , between Oct 2009 and May 2010. We are mainly interested in : 1. Strong field. 2. Medium length event (about 3 days of play). Any suggestions ? I heard about a tournment in Milano in December. Has anyone played there , and wishes to share his personal experience?

Passing for penalties might work well , especially if LHO is an aggressive overcaller. If you don't like penalty passes "under the trumps" on the 1 level , I think the alternative is 2NT, 1NT is an underbid. I think 2NT rebid in competition should not be 18-19, it is needed for "strong notrump strength" hands with length in opps suit.

Strong hand without a clear direction. Possible hands are 5332 (18-19, or if you would not open 1NT then 15-17 as well), strongish 5341, 6241 (that is not sure if ♦ or ♠ could be the best strain).

Pass. Having a side 4 card ♠ suit is a bigger flaw than a 4card ♥ suit, because we are more likely to be able to outbid them when we have ♠s.

Possible meaning for 4NT in competition: 1st priority : takeout showing 2 places to play. Cannot logically aply here (would have applied if they overcalled 4M) 2nd priority : natural (only if we bid 3NT earlier - does not apply here) So we are left with 3rd priority: Blackwood.

2NT showed 23-24. 4♣ over 3NT is natural. I invited with 4NT , pd passed with : AQJ Axx Kxx AKQ9 ♠ finesse was offisde , so slam was not making. Other table had a misunderstanding: 2♣-2♦ 2NT-3♣ 3NT-4♣ 4♦-5NT 7♣ 4♦ was intended as a cue, but partner was not sure, and bid 5NT as choice of slams. Opener thought that is GSF , and bid 7♣. They were happy to go down 2 :rolleyes:

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=st5hj92daq2cj8642]133|100|Scoring: IMP 2♣-2♦ 2NT - 3♣ 3NT - ?[/hv] 3♣ = puppet stayman 3NT = no majors. (2NT was not available on the 1st round - would have shown ♥s). What's the plan now?

Double, becaus when partner has this hand we are beating them a lot in either 3♦ or 3♥.

One problem that I can see with the suggested switch is that after a natural 1♥-1NT 3♣ responder has a very useful option of 3♥ , showing a doubleton, which might be what the opener is waiting to hear if he has 6-4, 6-5, or concentrated 5-5. If Opener bid instead , as suggested 1♥-1NT 3♥ responder does not have room to show doubleton support.

As far as I undestand , the director did not allow North to change his bid, because it was clear that it was not a mechanical error, and he wanted to bid 3♠ at the time he bid it. After deciding that she allowed the auction and play to continue, and later ruled that she believed East that he did alert. Are there any special sircumstances in the case as described (pre-alert, previous occurance of the sequence, basicness of the bidding sequence, North's refusal to confirm South's speculation, North waking-up and remembering) that might lead you to shift the responsibility to North (the Alert reciever)?

Israel. I did not mention the place in my description, because I wanted to know how this would have been handled elsewhere.

I see another problem with your suggested format. Do you think it is a good idea that a team practices for a long time , prepares itself, travels half the globe to get to the event, spends a lot of money , and then gets eliminated after 1 or 2 days of play? It seems wrong to me, to ask players do all the effort of coming to the BB , and then "kicking" them away so fast. What are they supposed to do ? go home? become tourists? play some minor side event? I think they are entitled to a week of play, for the effort of qualifying within their country, and from their zone.

Agree strongly with that. And (though perhaps this is off-topic) I am surprised this exact objection is rarely raised with regard to the Spingold and Vanderbilt.

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=sq762h9843da72ck7&w=skhq752dkcaqjt843&e=saj853htdqj653c92&s=st94hakj6dt984c65]399|300|Scoring: IMP P-1♣-P-1♥* X-3♣*-3♠-X P-P-4♥-X ALL PASS down 4 , NS -800.[/hv] Teams,KO, 3rd 16 board segment out of 6 , played with screens (North and East on the same side). Serious tournament , all players very experienced with international experience. Before start of play E/W pre-alerted that they play transfer responses to 1♣. Also a similar sequence with a transfer response to 1♣ had occured few boards earlier in the same segment and was alerted. East says he alerted the 1♥ bid (shows 4+ ♠s). He did this by pointing to the bid on the tray , which is not strictly correct procedure (Correct procedure is using the Alert card). Both East and North agree that is the way both of them have been alerting their bids throughout the match. North did not ask about the alert, which seemed normal to East because of the pre-alert, and because of a similar sequence taking place few boards earlier. East also alerted the 3♣ bid (because it denied 3♠). North says he did not notice the alert of 1♥, so interpreted South's double (which really showed ♥s) as t/o and bid a natural 3♠. He also did not ask about the alert of 3♣ , probably assuming it denied 3♥s. After East started thinking (and before East bid anything), North asked East "Wait, what was 1♥?". When he heard it shows ♠s he went to talk to the director away from the table. The director did not allow him to change his 3♠ bid, and after talking to East and North ruled that she believes the 1♥ bid was indeed properly alerted, because East said he is sure he did alert, and because he has been alerting this for several years without any incidents, and also considering the pre-alert , and the transfer responses used earlier. After conclusion of play the director was called again , and ruled that the table result NS -800 stands. Other table were NS +200, so EW team gained 14 IMPs. Side issue : While director was sorting things out , South told North "tell the director that you were watching East all the time, and you are sure he did not alert". North refused to confirm that. N/S appealed the ruling. The AC decided to award them 3 IMPs back. I am not sure what was the exact reasoning - I think it was something along the lines of : If North would get the correct explanation he would bid 3♥ (Since then his partner's double would show ♥s), which could be either doubled or not , resulting with either -150 NS or -500 NS, which combined with the other room result produces 11 IMPs. The match ended by EW team winning by a large margin, so this board did not decide the result. I would welcome any comments about : 1. Relevant laws. 2. Director's actions and ruling. 3. South's comment to his partner. 4. AC decision.

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=s732hakqt3dj9ca53]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♥-1♠-2♥-2♠- ?[/hv] Pass or 3♥? And more generally , when do you compete to the 3 level with 8 trumps (playing IMPs)?

Agree, though natural bids seem to be out of fashion.

So what do you do with 542 AK842 AQ94 5 sell out? If you bid 2♦ isn't that a big spread for such a call? PASS. To reopen I need either shape (short ♠, 5-5, 6♥..) or extra values.

I think your example hand is an easy 2♥. Going past 2♥ carries a serious risk of going down in something , since there is no known fit, and not enough hcp to believe we will make 2NT. I prefer to use this 2♠ as a good ♦ raise (10-11) and 3♦ as a weaker raise (8-9). If you wish you can also include invitational ♣ hands (10-11, 6♣) in the 2♠ bid, with 2NT by opener asking if responder really has ♦ or ♣.