mtvesuvius

Right, because we'll be able to find this out using stayman... OF COURSE, why didn't I think of that. I'll bid stayman to find partner's exact shape. Perfect.

6♠, you answered your own question in the OP.

X of 2N, passing seems silly. This gets partner involved and will make our problems much easier. Now I guess I'd bid 3♠, random guess though

6♦. What else?

1. Pass. It's Equal red (the worst VUL possible), and this hand has no shape, and no redeeming value. Unless partner can reopen, I don't want to declare anything... Even if he can, I'm not happy about it. 2. Pass. This rates to be a big misfit, and if it isn't, the opponents will probably reopen with 2♥ or something. I don't like 1N at all here. 3. 2♥. Perfect by a passed hand, it's NF constructive, and shows this hand or something similar. 4. ♦Q Our bidding on this hand was "mildly conservative". I would have been forcing to game, and possibly even slam with this... Not making multiple non-forcing calls. The ♥Q falling is more likely than the ♦K, also RHO is more likely to be short in hearts, and therefore not have the ♥Q. I'd hook the diamond, and if it wins, I'll repeat the hook, playing the ♥AK. If it loses, I play for the drop once more. 5. What was partner's diamond spot? What are your spot-card leads? Regardless, I'd win the diamond and play back another club. Hopefully declarer will have transportation issues, and won't be able to manage everything now. Just a guess really. 6. 2♦. Considering partner's wide range here and our general values, I think the false preference is needed in case partner can keep the bidding open. 7. ♥3, or whatever my systemic heart spot is. There isn't a rule against partner having entries in spades too. 8. There has to be a way to show this hand. Not playing INV minors, and not playing 2♣ as a GF makes this annoying, but I'd bid 2♣, then wait and see what happens. Maybe partner will describe their hand and we'll be able to place the contract well. Maybe not, and we'll be making a shot in the dark. Oh well, it's justice served imo.

I'm sure it'll be in Under Further Review within the next week.

Seems like a game of dice to me.

3♠ - 6♠ or 1♠ - 2♥ 2♠ - 3♥ 3♠ - 4♣ 4♦ - 4N (Known ♦ Keycard, so subtracting one from RKC response for slam... RKC - ♠) 5♥ - 6♠

No, no, yes

INV, (16)17-18ish

3N... YUCK at 4N.

INV for sure

3♥ if limited openings, otherwise 4♥

1N

12 boards?! I normally get in at least 23 hands, and at least one or two slams... I don't see how it is possible to play 15 boards and win or do well. I also don't see how it is possible to open all hands that you would normally open and do well. These tournaments require a different strategy, and clearly you have something backwards.

FWIW I played 440 hands on BBO last month, and passed two of them out. One with a robot, one with a regular partner. This is not counting the Passouts in Robot Reward tournaments.

This is ACBL lala-land: Suppose the following auction occurred, playing 2/1: 1♥-1♠ 3♥-4♠ 3N* - Pass *Partner is a student, and corrects 3N to pass before the director arrives. She also makes the comment "I want to play HERE!" before correcting to a pass. The director arrives, and then gives the opponents the option of accepting either call. They choose 3N. Can you construct a hand where passing 3N is clearly right despite the huge UI, and bidding 4♠ is not a LA? Clearly if 4♠ here is an LA, it must be chosen I think.

lol @ pass 2♠ is wtp imo

But you are allowed to psych or misclick lol

No I mean after keycard. As is, I'd probably try to keycard in clubs, but I like to do that way too much

3♣, won't always work, but it pays to get in there.

He knows you have all the keycards, and he knows you are missing a King someplace. He gambled that it was in the club suit apparently. Clearly it was a minor suit king since you'd bid 5♠ with ♠ problems, so the 7♥ call was effectively 50-50... Not that I'm advocating it.

I would generally prefer to bid 2♠, then if possible, bid hearts later.

lol

I'll check later today w/Andrew and see if he found people, otherwise we'd play if you want...