hotShot

Don't you have the Poll Button if you create a new topic?

I don't trust 3♥ to be natural, so it would like to know more about the kind of event and if opps are a bunch of BBO pickup experts or an etablished f2f partnership. Without further agreement I would expect partners dbl to be penalty either holding the ♥ or the strong hand.

I would simply try 3NT (since 2NT is not an option) Since both opps did not bid ♥ and partner also did not choose ♥, the ♥ should be evenly distributed or LHO has some ♥ length but the suit is bad and he lacks side entries, otherwise we could have bid something over 1♠.

I may be naive, but I think there has to be a legal and ethical way to act if you don't have sufficient agreements. West made a bid, knowing that it was undiscussed and could be taken in a wrong way. East raise to 4♥ made it clear that the bid was taken as natural, otherwise East would have bid ♠ or the minors. East also knows that the bid is undiscussed and 5♣ is a clear indication that West does not want to play in ♥. So I think the table result has to stand.

The announcement says September 6th! Guess that has to be October :).

Of cause they mean the combination of HTML5, CSS and Javascript. The mobile vugraph mentioned above is a pure HTML/Javascript solution. The problem with Javascript is, that there are to many browser specific implementations that don't follow a standard. It would be to much trouble to get something as complex as BBO to run on lets say the 20 most popular browser (versions).

Well I'm not GIB, but you promised 4+♥ and GIB has 6 to the K. Combined 10+ should be "save" following the Law of Total Tricks. You lost 6 tricks, 2 of them to ♥AQ. Unfortunately you only had the smallest (J) of the 3 missing honors and the 4th trump, that you did not have, might have been worth an extra trick. So with the hand GIB expected from you, making 10 tricks is no that unlikely.

Dude, you really have complex problems....

Guess I joined 2002. I have hand records from that year. And I'm sure that I have seen 2 digit numbers for players online a lot.

Hint: http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-96489-galleryV9-vgxm.jpg

A few weeks after learning the basics of bridge, we went to join a local club. The first club night we encountered that there are more ways of Acol than we knew and that there are Precision, Polish Club, Mosquito and several flavors of 5 card Majors around. After a few boards we had to play against a Multi-opening and had no idea what to do. So while waiting for the new round to begin we came up with a defense: "We assume opener has a weak 2 in ♥." Obviously this works, if opener has a weak 2 in ♥. It works if opener has a strong balanced hand since we are unlikely to be strong enough to bid something anyway. If could fail if opener has a weak 2 in ♠. It does not matter much if we want to play in a minor, but if would be a problem if we would want to overcall with a 5 card ♠ suit. The suit distribution would have be something like 6-5-1-1 or 6-5-2-0. The probability for such a break is less than 2% and partner will hardly stop bidding in a 5-1 or 5-0 fit. We never felt the need to look up a better defense.

It is standard scientific practice that any formula or method you use, a] has a name and is referenced in every decent textbook (by definition the course manual is part of this set...) or b] has a reference pointing to the source, where it comes from. Since the formula is not of type a] and has no reference b], you can reduce the points by any amount you like. Obviously the students did not understand the question and one of them found some sort of solution that was rumored around.

Well google comes up with: http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/general_physics/2_5/2_5_7.html ntp − 1 = (ns − 1) × { p[1 + p(60.1 − 0.972t) × 10−10] } / { 96 095.43(1 + 0.003 661t) }

If I open 1♠ and make the remark: "I open 1♠", there is no extraneous information, so this Law would not apply. If an opponent asks about the agreed meaning of a bid, and there is an agreement and it is properly disclosed, there is no extraneous information. Unless there is reason to believe that the agreement was forgotten, there is no case.

Seems to me the 1eyed sees more than the experts. The cost for manpower are much lower in less developed counties and often they don't have environmental restrictions and no social security costs. To compensate for that, the productivity has been optimized and the payment of the employed people did grow slower that the prizes. Especially in the US a lot of the demand was payed on credit. At some point people have to repay the money they borrowed. It's my impression, that the banks worldwide are less careless about who they borrow money. As a result both entrepreneurs and customers have problems to get money from the banks. We are looking at the combined effect of globalization, international economics and "casino investment banking".

There are 4 cases to look at: 1) 4♠ and 5♥ are both down Don't bid 5♥. 2) 4♠ makes and 5♥ are down You should bid, if you being down is cheaper than 4♠ depending on vul. 3) 4♠ and 5♥ both make You need to bid 5♥. 4) 4♠ is down and 5♥ makes You should bid, if 4♠ is less than down (2)3 depending on opps vul. Before you do the math you need to know which of the 4 situations applies.

Are you very used to your touchpad? Because if you put your finger on it to move the mouse a little bit to hard, it is a click.....

When I was still an inexperienced player a law "expert" gave me the following advice: If you can't decide between bidding and passing in tempo, then bid. Your hesitations will be harder to notice, and if they are noticeable, usually passing applies more restrictions to partner than bidding.

A psyche is a gross deviation from your agreements. So the TD should ask about the agreements first. If the agreement itself is not illegal, the TD can decide if the deviation is minor or gross. OP did not mention that the TD asked about the agreement, so unless there was a disclosure in the alert box, the decision process was flawed. I think it's wrong to ban psyches, but if the announced rules are that psyches are not allowed, you either don't play there or you don't psyche. A no psyche rule is ridicules, because if you follow it e.g. misbids have to be treated as an illegal psyche. The OP further states that is was an optimistic preempt, I read that as partners preempt was outside the the expected range.

They probably have the same agreement as 99% of the world which is "preemptive". He also had preemptive hand. Maybe it's aggressive action, maybe not. It's not matter of disclosure at all. It's matter of assuming that everybody must conform to your chosen style of play and if they don't they must be psyching. It is a matter of disclosure, because you have to disclose agreements and partnership experience. Since the OP did not mention that this was a "first time pickup partnership", I assume that they have a partnership experience about preempts, that should have been disclosed. Even without detailed agreements, you usually have meta-agreements about 2nd suits, that you are required to disclose.

Man, no decent+ bridge player has agreements about hcp when it comes to opening 4♥. I don't think there are more than tiny % of sane bridge players who require 7 card suit either. It seems that you just made some assumptions about what you would open 4♥ with and assumed those must be standard. TD probably did the same and that's why i wrote she doesn't understand how bridge is played. I agree with that policy. Here though we have ridiculous case and it's understandable that play lost his nerves. If you enter a tourney, made tough 3NT on first board and TD came to the table and say: "hahaha I will adjust it to average now cause I feel like it" would you leave the tourney ? It's basically what happened here. 4♥ was an overall not an opening. I don't know what you and your friends consider to be "standard", but I hope you recognize that there are regional and systemic differences about what is considered "standard". Around here an unalerted 2M opening has to be considered to be strong, although I haven't met anyone in the last 15 years who opens strong 2s ..... And the rules for alerting and the law about disclosure do apply to decent players too.

The question if this is a psyche or not depends on your agreement. If your agreement requires you to have 7+♥, no side suit and about 10 HCP, than the given hand is a gross deviation. I assume that your partner alerted and disclosed your agreement about such an preempt. The software allows the TD to see the bidding at your table the same way you do. So the TD can see alerts and explanations given to the alert. Unfortunately your post does not include your agreement. If your partner did not alert his bid and disclosed that your agreed strength can be as low as 3 HCP and that your preempts can be2-suited, the TD will assume some sort of "standard" for such a bid. Compared to many "standards" I can think of, I would consider 4♥ to be a gross deviation. (Which would be irrelevant since I don't ban psyches...) Adjusting the wrong board is a "finger fault" that should not happen, I hope the interface improved in that area.

It was our Clubs team night and we (a team of beginners) had to play a guest team that had won the national championships some time ago. After 6 (embarrassing) of 8 boards I found a 6♠X sacrifice over their making 6♥ that I could make. The double slam swing gave us a draw ..... I had regular opening strength and 7♠ when the player in front of me opened a 2♠ weak 2. I passed, LHO passed and my partner bid 3♣, LHO looked relieved, I was frustrated and than opener raised his own preempt to 3♠. Now I could dbl for penalties it since opener has the trump ace he was down 8.

Are you telling me that, if I accidentally grab the pass card and quickly turn it around and look at the numbers on the back, than I can put it back and bid some level of some denomination without getting trouble about UI?

I would imagine that a "Team Match Club" in an analog way to the MBC, would be a better solution.