hotShot

Maybe you are right, but I guess you would bid: 1♦ - 1♠ 2♣ holding 4♦ and 5♣ or 5♦and 4♣. So responder will believe he needs 4 (of 7) ♣ cards to have a ♣ fit for sure and he will need 4 (of 8) ♦ cards to be sure he has a fit opposite partners minimum length in ♦. When in fact 2♣ or 3♦ will do.

When I hold 6 card in a suit, partners long time average is holding 2+1/3 cards in that suit, so I expect a combined 8+1/3 fit. 8+1/3 means that we will have an 8 card fit most of the time, sometimes a 9 card fit and rarely only combined 7 cards in that suit. When I hold 5 card in a suit, partners long time average is holding 2+2/3 cards in that suit, so I expect a combined 7+2/3 fit. 7+2/3 means that we will have 8 cards a little more than half of the time. In SAYC and 2/1 opening 1♣and rebidding 2♣ over partners 1M bid, almost always promises a 6 card suit. Bidding this way will lead us to a highly likely 8 card fit, but conceals the ♦ length. Starting the bidding with 1♦ and rebidding 2♣ ( or 3♣ ) conceals the ♣ fit and it's hard to see how revealing this 9 cards can be an advantage, if it forces us to play an 8 or 7 card fit at the 3 level, or a 5-1 ♠ fit on the 2 level.

South does not want to help East to delevop Wests ♠ to a source of tricks. East should have stopper in the red suits, so South would like East or North to start playing ♥. ♣ was bid by East so it's not very attractive, leading from the Q can give away a trick far to often. South has no ♦ values and since West showed 5-6 ♠ and [East] opened ♣, ♦ seems the best bet to find some honors with North. It's not very attractive to lead ♦ because of East potential stopper, but it is the leas unattractive lead.

The only problem I have with the 2♥ bid, is that the hand contains 4 cards in openers suit. This indicates that opps might not have a fit, not that we are worried about them, but this often means that we don't have a fit either. North should reconsider the hand evaluation. Obviously the NS partnership has a lack of agreements, if overcalls can look like that (which I don't consider a problem), than strong hands enter the bidding with dbl. So if this was agreed, than South has no reason to bid. East has already passed and it's unlikely that West will overbid 2♥ on his own. Even if South expects North hand to be stronger, I don't understand 3♥, because there is no fit. North bidding is not good, but South bidding is strange. So I put (much) more blame on South.

I was told that in a Mixed, the gentleman should do the administration. This requires sitting north to write down the results and sitting east to check what north is writing. But the age of gentlemen is over ......

Imagine I have just played board XX and I'm writing down our table result. I discover that the results 1-5 are identical to ours which is result number 7. The 6th result is the same contract claimed made by the other axis. Am I allowed to draw the TD's attention to this strange result? How is that different from drawing attention to a grand made in a trump suit, that I could not make because where opps held the trump ace? Does the knowledge that it was a misclaim and not a mix-up of cards make a difference? Why should it be a breach of rules to ask the pair involved how they managed to lose their trump ace trick?

It's not a percentage of the mass. Setting: You stand there and the steel bar thrown at you, has it's ends parallel to the line between your sholders. Locking from your position, the left end of the steel bar passes you, while it's right end hits your left shoulder. The steel bar will start to rotate and your chest will take the same amount of angular momentum (so hat the combined angular momentum stays 0.), your body will also take some of the bars momentum, but a (big) part of it, is used to deform your body and crush your bones. The steel bar will fly further with a reduced speed. So if you want to simplify it to a percentage you have to take a percentage of the momentum. Since the mass of the steel bar does not change, the change in momentum (mass * speed)thanks helene_t leads to a change of speed. You get the amount of energy available for deformation, by calculating the changes in kinetic energy ( mass * speed2) .

What is the claim? South raised the 2♠ bid, he believed to be natural to 4♠. That contract was dbled for penalty, so 5♣ is unlikely to be a slam try in ♠ (North could score big with redbled overtricks), so why should South bid 5♠? I don't see where South got any UI. Does North have to alert South 4♠ bid? Would be interesting to know if this bid has an agreed meaning in North view. After a 1NT opening 4♠ can hardly be a Splinter and if it should show a control, does it deny first round controls in cheaper suits? The NT opening makes it unlikely that South has a long ♠ suit, at least long enough have a fit opposite North single. North has UI that South did not alert 2♠, but it is AI that South opened 1NT and that West dbled. So I don't think there is a LA to 5♣.

A lot of people have not realized yet, that they are carrying big parts of the losses. A lot of those now worthless paper where invented, because there was/is more money looking for interests than the amount of money that can be put in save credits and mortgages. A significant part of that money is from life insurances and pension plans. Don't be surprised when you retire, when your pension plan or life insurance did not deliver the expected profits. If politics would have allowed the banks to go down, they would have taken down some insurances and pension fonds too. What do you think would happen if a significant amount of citizens would have to discover, that their pensions are gone?

Paul died, who is going to make reliable predictions in soccer now?

Let those who have not been in worse slams cast the first stone .....

Opposite 0-7, I'll stay as low as I can in ♦.

No. Edited because I misread auction....

I'll pass. If we get doubled I can think again......

I don't see how we can go down a lot in 5♦. In a worst case scenario we could lose 2♠, a ♣ and 2-3 trumps, but ..... We know that RHO has 4+♥ and partner has 4-♥. Partner is likely to have only 5-6 cards in the black suits, so there is a good chance we won't lose 3 cards in the black suits, holding 4 top-tricks in the black suits. Since LHO has shown a void in ♦ partner and RHO share 7 ♦ cards. We have a ♦ fit. If we can finesse, the missing ♦ honors are onside. If partner has 4♦ we won't lose more than a ♦ trick, if he has only 3 his share of the missing QJT8xxx will also limit the number of ♦ loser to 0 to 2. Distribution has to be very bad for us to be more than 1 down.

What is 4♥ over opps 3♥ in your system?

LOL

As you can read here: GIB System notes GIB takes 2♣ as Cappelletti not as natural. Since GIB has a single ♦, it is most probable that partner is one-suited in ♦. But Cappelletti does not seem to be a part of SAYC.

Seems that we can really use Google search on the new forum.

Since you could log in, there is a BBO ID and a BBO Forum ID 'FrancesHinden', that have the same password. Are you talking about a different BBO forum ID?

I guess that 3♠ is nonforcing and denying ♥. In that case you have AI, that your partner has some values and you can see from your own hand that he's likely to have some (5-) ♥. You also know that partner is unlikely to be long (3-) in ♠. With long ♦ partner could have bid 4♦ and with both minors he could dbl. You also know from your hand, that partner is unlikely to have a (solid) ♣ stopper and that he's likely to be short there. You have AI that partner will have trouble to find a bid. You get the additional UI that partner probably has values in ♥ (and that is no surprise either), that would be wasted in a ♣ contract. I don't see that partners hesitation suggests something over another. But if you insist, while I would bid 4♣ many people I know would pass with this hand.

At the moment, everyones quota both positive and negative is 0. Basically this new gadget is not active up to now. There is a post from Rain, saying that activating this feature is not top of the list, but somewhere among the top 10.

I see an active user called "Google" every now and than. It is displayed, but you can't click on it to get to the profile. Does that mean we can search the forum content using google some time soon?

You are right, have you tried the little wheel right next to the search field top of the page?

If you click on a players name, in the middle of the screen there is: Isn't what you get when you select 'Posts' what you are looking for?