mtvesuvius

Whoops, perhaps H)? lol

$20 says she's Italian. Anyway, I agree with you, and had a partner who had very similar beliefs. I couldn't take it, couldn't read any of his leads, and felt completely in the dark on his signals... Don't get me started on discards.

A) You'll have to live with it. B) It takes additional effort to turn them off. C) Oh crap, there isn't a "B" anymore. I do agree that there is very little reason to have a sunglass smiley, since lists are more common IMO. Or another simple solution would be to make the Sunglass smiley something like "x)"

Right, if the plan all along was to RKC, we couldn't bid this way. Having bid 2♦ I guess 4♣ is kinda forced on us. It's probably right to move over 4♥ though, idk

It's close between 1♠ and 4♠. I think I'd probably open 4♠, but 1♠ could easily be right. The problem with 1♠ is that we probably won't get our hearts in anyway, unless partner bids 2♥ over 1♠. 4♠ could be very wrong, but it looks right here.

I'd splinter 4♣. If partner has club wastage, we don't want to be in slam, if they have a good hand opposite club shortness, we definitely want to be there. I'm not sure whether I'd make one more try over 4♥, I think I'd give up though.

I'd lead the ♣6. If I was going to lead a spade, I'd lead a low one.

I'm really really tempted by 7♣. Neither opponent will have any idea what's going on, and on a hand like this, I'd like to give them the last guess. My second choice would be pass followed by 6♣. I think I'd go for 7♣ though.

Behead 'em!

GIB really will drive people mad, eh? ;)

You bid your hand Partner will bid his Magical things happen

If 1N-P-P-2H-P-P-X is penalty, then 1N-P-P-2H-X should be penalty as well. I don't think either auction should be penalty, the first should be card-showing, the latter being takeout. I'd play 1N-2x-P-P-X always takeout.

In general problems based on "style" are not good since something like this isn't really a bidding problem as much as it is a location problem. Same thing with the two opening bid hands, some would open, some would not -- It's not a matter of bridge judgement as much as it is personal preference. IMO those types of hands rarely make good Bridge Poll questions. All the 2♠ bidders (myself included) will claim this is an unlucky hand. All the 2♥ bidders can say "See, 2♥ IS better!"

I usually play that 2M in 4th seat is a hand that would reject an Invitation after 1M-1N (or 2x)-2M-3M. This hand is a good hand for a 4♠ opening though.

Funny, I had almost the exact same hand last weekend, didn't end well though, we wound up in 3♠ X -3, anyway yes 2♥ should be Michaels and is perfect for this hand.

Agree with 655321, what else is there to say? :)

3♦ over 3♣ is natural and GF. 2♣ should set a GF, so there isn't any need to jump around.

Penalty. I'd pass with 1, pull with 0 I think

lol I was wondering which one of us was going crazy

Huh? I don't see where the OP ever mentioned possibly having 9 HCP. Perhaps the regulations might not allow you to psych a 1♣ or 1♦, but I would think this system is GCC legal...

I really don't get the point of this thread though, if you play Inverted Minors it's a clear 2♣, if you don't play them it's a clear 3♣, if you are spiting or masterminding it's a clear 1♥.

If your system clock is inaccurate, the post will show as unread until your system time passes the time BBF thinks the post was made.

Rainer's example may be a bit contrived, but there are so many hands that partner won't even begin to move over 2♥ with, where game is excellent, if not cold. Rainer's example might even pass 3♥! Facing anything but terrible wastage in both minors, game rates to be a fairly good contract, and 3♥ should be fine when partner passes. I still don't see the point of 2♥ though, we're not getting too high that often.

I'm assuming decent bridge, yes. I hate problems where "Partner is clueless, what can you do get to the right spot without any input from partner at all?" This hand is why inverted minors were invented, if I couldn't bid 2♣ I'd bid 1♥.

I admit I would have bid on over 4♦, we don't need too much, and partner's actual hand is quite unfortunate. Should partner be jumping to 5♦ with a slightly better hand?