eros2

We don't have anything for 5-5 weak (I suppose I would transfer to the stronger suit and pass), but major suit bids over interference are natural and non forcing. 5-5 invitational = 1NT-3D Game force cue bids after a 3 level response etc. I agree that 3NT is usually the best spot, that's why opener can just bid that and play there. With 1.5 stoppers in each major, that's clearly the best option. However, the gadgets do allow us to find a 5minor game if the major stoppers are shakey. Thank you for your input, awm. I agree entirely with your points. However, we find it working well long term.

Well we have methods for showing just about any hand. The thing with our system is that responder only needs one bid and opener knows everything. We have an agreement that: 2S is a club transfer 6+ cards 0+ HCP 3C is a diamond transfer 6+ cards 0+ HCP We have Texas for 6+ card majors 1NT-2H-2S-3H would show 5-4 majors 1NT-2C-2D-2H would show 4-5 majors 1NT-2C-2D-3minor would show 4-5 shape etc. We never had any use for 3H/3S because it is just not necessary. Responder will know if slam is on anyway, because opener has described his hand. It is up to responder to place the contract.

Hello, I would just like to share an agreement between my partner and I for showing minors after a strong 1NT opening. I have no idea if it is already an established convention, but we worked it out and it has been very successful so far. Our requirements for 1NT are: 1. 15-17 HCP (no quacky 15 counts though) 2. 4-3-3-3, 5-3-3-2, 4-4-3-2 shape (can include 5CM) Responses to show minors: 3♥ = 5-4 in the minors 9+ HCP (+1 for 5 card suit at 3NT) 3♠ = 5-5 in the minors 8+ HCP Opener's rebids after 3♥: 3♠ = minimum, 3-3 or 4-4 in the minors, asking for 5 card suit 3NT = to play* 4♣/4♦ = 4 cards, minimum or quacky/mismatched values 4♥/4♠ = maximum, premium values, 4-4 in the minors, ace cue** 4NT = maximum, 4-4 in the minors, asking for 5 card suit Opener's rebids after 3♠: 3NT = to play* 4♣/4♦ = non forcing 5♣/5♦ = maximum, 4 cards 4♥/4♠ = maximum, premium values, undisclosed 4 card minor***, ace cue** *With slam interest, responder continues with Gerber. **With slam interest, responder continues with a 4♠ cue or Blackwood. ***Responder later bids 5♣/6♣/7♣ which opener can pass or correct to ♦. We have regularly avoided failing 3NT contracts, making 4 level part scores or superior 5 minor games instead. We also found some excellent thin slams. I hope you will consider this useful resource!

Righty would be ruffing a loser. The only difference is that 4S is -2 (instead of -1) if a ♥ is returned and the hook is failing. If it is working, we still make the contract by drawing trump before cashing the A♣. Suppose that righty fails to switch to a ♥ after ruffing at trick 2, now there is no threat if trumps are 1-3. Win any return, cash AQ♠ and your minor suit aces (if trumps are not 0-4). Exit with a diamond to the J♦ as before. Still no idea what I would do with a spot card lead.

What does lefty lead? A spot card or honour? On the K♣ lead, I am looking for righty to give count. Suppose righty shows an odd number, I duck 2 clubs, win the third and take the AQ♠. I lead to the A♦ and back to my J♦, endplaying lefty if he has K♦ (righty ducks) and trumps split 1-3, 0-4 or 2-2. A ♦ switch at trick 2 would be annoying... Righty can force me into the ♥ hook if I duck. I don't know about anything else...

No? All 3 choices end up in dummy. Partner cannot be void in diamonds - or we would not have been able to cash 3 black suit tricks. There is no way to promote a Qx trump holding opposite.

I suppose there is a possibility that lefty rounded down to 2H with AQ 7th and a barren shape (2-7-2-2) due to the vulnerability. Therefore, partner has the stiff K♥. I exit with anything except a trump (it may telegraph the position).

Repainting the fence =/= no more fence. Regulation in any guise has failed.

So the world produces and America consumes? How is this sustainable? Consider the following analogy (borrowed from Peter Schiff); There are 4 people shipwrecked on an island, 3 Asians and an American. The Asians split themselves to forage, fish and start a fire. The American is designated the role of eating. However, the Asians are perfectly capable of eating the food themselves and once they realise this, the American is redundant. The truth is that US creditors already know this, but are stuck between Scylla and Charybdis. They are loath to stop lending to America because a run on the greenback would destroy the value of their vast foreign currency reserves held in USD. That is not to say this eventuality will never happen. America is NOT too big to fail. China is still buying US assets and treasury bonds for example, but there will be a tipping point. Of course the short term consequences would be disastrous for all concerned, but the creditors will be better off in the long term. However, US recovery would be much much slower and significantly more painful. Barack Obama's plans will only exacerbate the problem. "The Americans can always be depended upon to do the right thing after they have exhausted every other possibility" - Winston Churchill. I know so many people who are betting against the dollar now.

I would respect the vulnerable overcall and give righty credit for some values. My K♦ looks like it is scoring, but if partner has a black tenace, a finesse does not look promising. Then again, what do I lead on defense? I hate my soft values, but I prefer to bid 3H here - if in doubt, round up. I might escape a club lead and I have play opposite something as bare as AQx xx xx AJTxxx. I doubt ops would double and 3D looks significantly more likely to make than for 3H to be -2. --- On second thought, passing is perhaps superior. Play partner for A♣ and AQ♠ (needs to duck the J♠ lead unless covered) or KQ♠ (or we cannot beat 3D unless two ♣ tricks are cashing), and if dummy does not have AQ♥, partner needs to find the heart switch. We take 2♠, 1♥, 1♣ and 1♦. If dummy shows up with AQ♥, 3H was probably failing. If J♠ is covered, partner taking AQ♠ and giving me a ruff, I need to cross to the A♣ for a trump promotion with a 4th ♠. If partner has no 4th ♠, it is fingers crossed that declarer will take the ♦ hook.

Although I belong to the Austrian school of economics, I would argue that if nothing else were to be changed, the auto industry must be bailed out. Simply, you cannot solve a Rubik's cube by completing one face. There are no free markets in America, and certainly not the labour market. A generation of young adults would be marginalised by competition from laid off workers. Therefore, to allow the big 3 to go under would not solve anything. The problems are systemic in every market, and the problem is intervention. This is a lose-lose situation. Which do you prefer? Accountability at the cost of the economy, or wealth for a few and relative security at the cost of taxation? Both will lead to disaster, but the latter is more gradual and sensible people will have time to get out of the dollar.

This would be fine if GDP growth actually represented the creation of wealth. Unfortunately, the US economy is built upon consumption, which accounts for ~70% of GDP. This would also be fine if people were spending their own money. However, they are borrowing to consume, and that money originates from savers abroad in Asia and the Middle East. American "growth" is therefore largely dependant upon debt. This is a problem because taking on debt is the exact opposite of wealth creation; not only must the debt be repaid, but with interest. Wealth is created by investment. Investment is funded by saving, not consumption. The US economy is phoney and unsustainable. Money is a proxy for value. All else held equal and constant, it is a very good proxy. However, introduce speculators, information asymmetry, intervention and mistaken expectations, and it completely fails as an accurate indication of real value.

Investment has nothing to do with faith. If you have faith in something, that is speculation. Investment is based on concrete data and tangible fundamentals. I have no sympathy for anyone who falls for something like this.

I'm joining a local bridge club from January 3rd =] Otherwise, I make (and break) the same two resolutions every year: 1. Start everything as you mean to go on 2. Always finish what you start

Any hand where I do not mind passing 2D.