hotShot

No. Dbl would promise that I make 2+ tricks and since partner showed ♦ length I can not be sure to get the ♦A.

Partner did not open, so his ♣'s preempt is either too weak or somehow off shape. RHO passed 2♦, so partner decided not to run from the ♦ misfit (undoubled/white) and his direct 3♣ bid would have required more strength than he has. After LHO's 2♠-p-p he wonders where the HCP are and shows his long ♣. I think he expects us to have 5 ♦, but we hold 7. On the other hand, he is weak and without trumps in his hand, we can never make 3♦. My 2 aces will work in 3♣ too, so I pass.

North is not strong enough to go on after 4♥.

There can be no such thing as a 4th seat preempt, other than pass. (Who do you want to preempt if everybody else claimed to be to weak to bid.) Partner thinks that there is a save place to play and expects to score better than those who pass. If you don't have an agreement, than you should just pass. Your partner expects the strength you have and used it for his bid. He will be happy to find ♦ support.

Under the condition that our agreements include a weak 2 bid in diamonds. In first seat I preempt 2 opps and 1 partner. In 2nd seat LHO and partner share the strength RHO and I don't have, so I would preempt partner more often than in 1st seat.

West should bid 2♥.

If I were Vilgan, I'd find this rather offensive. Interesting that you did not find this offensive enough to make a comment. B)

Now we have seen impressive performances from Portugal, Germany, Netherlands and Spain. We will see how Greece and Sweden will introduce themselves.

I prefer that to people who don't open their 11 HCP count and can't stop bidding later, because they have show their 11 HCP.

Well the main reason I respond to a 1m openings when my hand is to weak, is that I'm void, single or double in that suit and partner only promised to have 3+. [hv=d=n&v=n&s=sxxxh98xxdxckjxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♦ - 1♥ 2♠ - ?[/hv] With the given hand partner could have a 4432 shape with 12-20 HCP, planning a 2NT rebid. Any spot different from 1♦ holding a 3-1 fit would have better play. After partners 2♠ rebid, we still don't have a fit although the worst case (3)4-3 fit is still better than the ♦ misfit. There is a good chance that partner has no use for my ♣ values (because he's short there) and if his ♦ are solid, he has no use for my shortage/trumps either. Last round it seemed that bidding could only make things better, this round it seems that bidding can (will) make things worse. If partner is expecting weak answers to 1m openings than he will proceed with caution over 2NT now. If he's expecting solid answers, than I have to uncover my previous action and pass.

The ethical behavior from your side is to assume that your partner had alerted the 2♥ bid, and intentionally bid 3♦. I guess you have a CC to prove you play kokish, so there is no agreement what this bid means. I don't know your general approach but I can think of 2 possible meanings for 3♦. 1) long ♦ suit and a hand (much) stronger than 2nd neg. no interest to play ♥ (single or void). 2) forgot the convention (AI). 4NT is a great bid and 1 keycard is perfect. I think your bid now is 7♦. Partner seems short in ♥ and you need to ruff your 4th ♠ at dummy, so 7NT won't make. Partner knows that all keycards are there when you bid 7♦ and that you need a ruff because you did not bid 7NT. So she has a chance to correct to 7NT holding ♥Q or ♣Qxx and ♠Jxxx.

GIB is quite simple in his bidding. You jumped to slam over GIB's 4♦ bid. GIB now expects you to have 25+ HCP. Opps bid ♠ so GIB's simulation won't give you much HCP in ♠ other than the Ace. The double fit in the minors and its ♥ holding together with your points (that should not be wasted in ♠), suggests to bid 7. (Playing with GIB, you have to accept that GIB is the aggressive bidder in the partnership.)

Italy did not perform like a champion, congratulation to the Netherlands.

Partners average strength is smaller than 10 HCP, so I think that opps are close to game, if they have a fit. I have a 7 card suit and it's almost sure that we have a fit here, so it is likely that they have a fit somewhere. (If not r/w) I bid 3♠ and let LHO do some thinking about bidding on the 4 level.

One would need to know more about the played cards, when West got to trick. The question is, what alternative does West have? If a round of ♥ was played, West can't play ♥. If 2 rounds of ♦ have been played, West won't play ♦. etc. What legal information does West have: 0) Beginners play the suit partner lead. 1) West holds 5♣. After trick 1 he knows about 10 cards. 2) ♦ split 2-2 or 3-2. 3) East dbled. => East has some♥ and/or Quicktricks. East did not fear that N/S run to a makable ♠ contract, so he probably needs some ♠. 4) Partner lead the ♣Q and North followed suit. 5) North showed ♥ preference, and partner seems to have some, so the ♥length of North seems limited to 4-5. He can hold 2-3♦. If he held ♣ single, he has to hold 6-4 ♠. If the ♠ are longer than the ♥ would he not give ♠ preference? 6) On the table, he could see ♣AKT. So East would have lead from ♣QJ98. He should have better leads available to dbl 4♥. 7) West has information from the previous tricks, here it is important to know if E/W got their ♦AK already. If so, West knows that there where other good leads available. West has legal information, that something is strange with the ♠ length of North and the ♣ length of East. North got to have more than one ♣ and East has to have something in ♠ leading to ♣ to short to bid. West can assume that East played the ♣Q for a reason, even if he can't see it. So I won't adjust here. (But perhaps I will now be forced to give N/S their money back....)

At the World Cup 2006 10 teams in the round of 16 where from Europe, 6 making it to the round of 8. From the semi final on it turned into a European Championship. Today we will see group C with the finalists from 2006 and the Netherlands who made it into round of 16 2 years ago. Tomorrow we will see the defending champion and 2 teams that made the round of 16 2 years ago. I think we will see Italy, France, Portugal and Germany in the round of 8. I won't be surprised to see Russia and Sweden there too, but in that group anything is possible. I think Croatia will make it to the next round. I hope that the Swiss make it to the next round (but I think it's unlikely).

This is of cause not an error of the BBOflash application. People using Firefox might be using plugin's like "Adblock" or "Orbit". These plugins add a tab to each flash object. Since the flash application uses 100% of the available space, these tabs cause scrollbars to appear. So if a user has a configuration like that, he usually won't see the lower buttons or the line to enter chat, because they are covered by the lower scrollbar. I think the loss to the right scrollbar is less significant. The only way to get rid of the scrollbars is to deactivate or even deinstall those features, before loading the application. "Orbit" is available for the IE as well so the problem might occur there too.

Since 2♦ is forcing, what is a direct 3♦? If that's a weak long suit without fit, fine. Otherwise since LHO will bid, I can pass and plan to overcall 3♦ over opps 2M contract. If partner is 17-19 he will find a bid over 2M, in which case we will still reach game.

The North hand is worth much more than an average 2NT rebid, at IMPs I would probably rebid 3NT. Over the 3♦ bid, I would bid 4♣, partner could have raised 2NT to 3NT, so he's unbalanced and wants to know more about my shape.

Since North and East are screen-mates, we can forget about South. If East thought that 3♣ is a cue-bid and that this is a partnership agreement, than East had to alert North. If there was no agreement about this bid and East thought that from 'general bridge knowledge' it is logical that 3♣ is a cue-bid, than East had no reason to alert. The rules require the TD to investigate, if there is an agreement. I understand that there is no agreement.If there is no agreement, there was no misinformation so the result stands. I might issue a formal warning to East for not knowing his system.

If for some reason I can't imagine N/S don't play ♣, after they get ♦A and/or ♠A, than E/W can drop West's ♣ on East's 4th♦, losing only ♦A,♠A and ♥K.

Is it really ambiguous? If responder had ♥, there must have been a forcing ♥ raise over 1♥. If responder does not have ♠'s (and is sort of balanced), than (if 3♠ shows support) he can bid 3NT now. If he does not have 4 ♠ or 4 ♥ and is unbalanced, he could have forced using inverted minors or splinter, if holding a ♣ fit. If he does not have 4 ♠ or 4 ♥ or 4-5♣ and is unbalanced, there must be/have been a forcing way to show his long diamonds. Even bidding 3NT would be an option now. Obviously you need to know a few agreements here. Another problem is: If 1♠ is natural and forcing (F1) how do you force opener to bid on next round? 1♣-1♦ 1♥-1♠ 1NT/2♣ - ? You don't have a new suit to bid, if you repeat your suit it's not forcing, if you raise partners suit now, it does not promise a good fit and is not forcing.

Looking through 2 planes of glass you have 4 surfaces. You will see the re-reflection of the mirrored image at surface 3 mirrored again from surface 2. I hope that is somehow clear. (Similar to a kaleidoscope.) This might cause a sort of dizziness similar to that of the mirror image.

This is not necessary, if partner has his bid he can pass, if he has it's his turn to pull 3NT to 4♥ as obviously we will have ♥ to reach his long suit.

If the ♣ lead was 5th and dropped the single K, you have a kind off ruffing finesse (playing ♣) through RHO's ♥, so this line will also work if LHO has the ♣ and RHO has long♥.