mich-b

Sorry, Of course declarer played ♣9 from dummy trick 3 , so West had to win the Ace. I fixed the diagram.

[hv=pc=n&s=skqt2hq5dkt2ckt94&w=sj874ht62dqj4caj8&n=shkj9874da75cq752&e=sa9653ha3d9863c63&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1cp1h1s1n2s4hppp&p=c6ctcjcqh7hah5h2c3c9cac2c8c7h3c4sas2s4h4]399|300[/hv] EW have both done very well on trick1 , but still failed on trick 5... Should East have solved the problem on trick 5 ? Could West help somehow? Do you think you and your favourite partner would get this defence right?

NF. In addition to the obvious advantages of 2♥ being NF , it also gives better definition for the overcallers rebid , if he does not choose to Pass. For example 2♠ from him is 100% 6 cards.

I think 2♠ is not enough. I would bid 2♠ with a ♠ less , so I am at least a trick better. If I agreed to play 3♠ as preemptive (poor agreement imo , very poor agreement as a passed hand) I would bid 4♠ perhaps after starting with 2♥.

[hv=pc=n&s=sat864hqj832d8ct3&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1dp1sp2cp]133|200|IMPs , playing 2/1 <br>You didnt have a "toy" for this hand on the first round.[/hv]

IMPs, playing 2/1: 1. [hv=pc=n&s=sqhak6dj76cqt8752&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c1s2c4s]133|200[/hv] 2. [hv=pc=n&n=sahat9764d75ckq85&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=ppp1h1s2d2s]133|200[/hv] (2NT here is natural, not Good/Bad and not 6/4)

An alternative rule (simpler and imo a little better): RKC if Y is a minor. a 2 suiter if Y is a major.

4NT here should show a ♦ fit , with longer ♣s , similar to the actual hand, though probably stronger. Amazingly my pd held almost the same hand this week in a BBO match , and chose to double , reasoning that if I bid 4♠ he would correct to 5♦. This turned out to be a great success since I had 4432 with ♥KQJ9... Full hand here : http://www.bridgebase.com/myhands/hands.php?traveller=6637-1295293650-43385264&username=mich-b

I might have bid 2♣ on the previous round , but 2♥ is fine. Now I would pass playing IMPs (and dont consider anything else) , but in MP I would consider a double to suggest this is our hand , and we should protect our plus.

Exactly. The fit makes defending 1♥X much less attractive, and also after passing the bidding might be at 2♠, by the time it gets back to you in which case you will regret not showing your fit and values immediately.

Agree with that. The ♥10 is surely the best technically. Pd and myself have the understanding , that a responder to Multi, should try to avoid responding 2♠ if he would prefer me to lead a ♠ in a situation like this.

For us , rebidding opener's 1st suit is the catchall. For example : 1♦ - 1♠ 2♣ - 2♥ 3♦ But , in your sequence , where opener has already denied 4♠, we use 3♠ as the catchall.

An important advantage of the Multi over weak 2s is that when responder has a good hand , and we end up playing 4-of-a-major, we play it from responder's hand (it is not difficult to arrange your responses this way). This is very good because : 1. The known hand is seen, and nothing is known about the closed hand (how many trumps? is there a side suit? are there ruffing values?) 2. Since responder's hand is probably stronger , making it declare is likely to protect some honours on trick 1. (less important than (1) imo). I think this advantage , makes your chances to make 4M (or sometimes 3M when you invite and opener rejects) considerably better. Most of the posters only discussed Multi's (obvious) drawbacks as a preemptive tool, but ignore this feature as a constructive tool on the way to bidding our game.

I would consider my hand worth a GF , and start with 2♣ hoping to sort out later which game is better : 5♦, 3NT , or even 4♠.

After 1m-1♠-2m , responder (assuming 2♥ is forcing) needs a way to show an invitational 5-5 in the majors, and a way to show a GF 5-5 in the majors. so which one is shown by bidding 2♥ then 3♥? I think that responder needs the 3♥ rebid for one of those hands (I think 3♥ as invitational 5-5 and 2♥-then-3♥ as GF is more popular , though we play it the other way around). I think this use for the bid is much more frequent , and valuable than splinter in ♥s.

My post was inspired by the 6♣ hand (well done , jschafer ) , but I did not mention the hand intentionally , because I did not want to get here into the discussion of whether UI was used there or not. My question here intentionally focused on a hypothetical , obvious UI, case, because I wanted to see if people think that trying to use UI is an offense in itself and should be punished regardless of whether it brought the offender good result or not.

[hv=pc=n&e=s7hk872dat83ck742&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1sp1np2hp]133|200[/hv] Playing 2/1 , Teams , do you invite or blast?

Lets assume the following has happened : During a slam going auction by your opps , LHO paused for a long time and signed off , but RHO still raised to slam. You call the director , and the facts are agreed , and the TD tells you to continue play. You see RHO's hand in dummy , and it becomes obvious (to you) that passing was surely a LA , and his raise may have been based on his partner's slow signoff. Anyway , declarer goes down in his slam and you enter +100 on your scorecard. Now , my question is : Would you leave it at that ? or would you still pursue the issue and file some kind of complaint against RHO for (what you think was) a blatant use of UI? Does it matter who are your opps ? or if you know them ?

[hv=pc=n&w=sq98h743djt8764ct&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=p2np3cp3dp]133|200|2NT = 20-22 <br>3C = Puppet Stayman <br>3D = 1 or both 4 card majors[/hv] Pass or 3NT? Can anyone run a simulation?

For those who are interested in what actually happened: 1st hand opener had [hv=pc=n&n=sa653hak4da82c953]133|100[/hv]. My partner staymaned and raised 2♠ to 4♠. But ♠s were 4-1 , and no miracle in ♣s so we were down (same result in other table). 2nd hand opener had [hv=pc=n&n=sakqhaj8dqj7c6432]133|100[/hv]. My partner passed, and we lost a game swing when other table just bid 3NT , and found ♥KQ onside.

Amazingly those 2 hands occured in a single tournament : [hv=pc=n&s=s9754h742d6cakt73]133|100[/hv] [hv=pc=n&s=s742h7d8632cakt65]133|100[/hv] In Both hands partner opens a 15-17 1NT (Teams) (in hand 1 , pd opened after 3 passes , and we are NV. in hand 2, pd was dealer and we are VUL against NVUL). Would you Pass , invite, bid game? (on both hands or either one)

A friend of mine is interested in playing in a festival/congress/tournament for several days up to a week , around mid May 2011. He is looking mainly for Pairs event, with a good (but not all expert) field, preferrably with some international participation, and ideally in a nice place for vacationing/sightseeing. Any suggestions? I have found on various web sites that around that time there is a Festival in South of Spain , and also the South African Nationals - does anyone (Fluffy?) have a personal experience of those?

4♦. If they bid 4♠ partner will look at his ♠s and ♦s , and will have a good chance of getting the decision right.

Hand 1 : I would lead a small ♥. Probably the Jack has some technical merit (perhaps the Queen is more likely to be in dummy than in decalrer's hand) , but I am afraid it will somehow mislead partner. Hand 2: I prefer a ♣, but would surely consider a high one , which loses when partner has 2 and the opps 3 clubs each (which is possible but very specific) but gains when I can figure out that a ♠ switch is needed.

[hv=pc=n&n=skjt74ha6daq4caq5&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=2np3hp4sp4np5dp5sp6sppp]133|200|[/hv] 2NT = 20-22 3H = Txf 4NT = RKCB 5D = 1 or 4 This happened in a teams match (second division). The 5♠ bid was made after agreed hesitation. EW called the director and said the hesitation created UI which may have influenced North's decision to raise to slam. North said, that with or without hesitation , 5♠ asked him to bid on with 4 keycards rather than 1. EW argued , that South should have figured out that the 2NT opener has 4 keycards and not 1 , and in that context his 5♠ bid, can be seen as a signoff. How would you rule: 1. As the TD? 2. If you are a member of the AC?