cherdanno

I do not suppose passing on such hands, or even holding such hands, is your idea of a good time either. But once you get into the habit you do not notice it anyway. There can be problems on many sequences - notably 1NT p 3NT, where the pause is definitely necessary, because every so often you have a solid suit type of hand and were expecting RHO to pass or transfer, and 3NT is a definite surprise. The suggestion that players will know when to pause and when it is not necessary is ludicrous. The average player cannot even understand why you alert Puppet Stayman - twice this week a player has had to be convinced - and everyone would have different views. For example, how many people realise that 1NT p 3NT is one time you must pause? I agree, the pause after 1N p 3N is DEFINITELY necessary. Similarly, a pause after 1S (2H) is DEFINITELY necessary. EVEN MORE so. Even more important is the pause after (1D). Seriously, you only think the pause after 1N p 3N is absolutely necessary because that's what you are used to. There are many other auctions where a mandatory pause would be much more frequently useful.

That LHO gets endplayed seems rather irrelevant to me, as the field will be taking 11 tricks whenever LHO has Kxx. (Or am I wrong in assuming that 3 rounds of diamonds will be the normal defense start?)

I would 4S, don't mind 1S, hate 3S.

I thought a resp double denied 4 of the focus major. Honestly asking if I am wrong about that. That's how many people would play it here. I think a responsive double of 2H absolutely denies 4 spades for everyone, one of 2S would deny four hearts for most, and one of 3H denies 4 spades only for some. So you are right and wrong, I think :lol: Btw, I was surprised Justin plays this double as penalty, I would have thought responsive is normal.

Do you really think the "intelligence sources" reporters in DC are talking to on one day work as undercover agents the other day? And yes in most cases such anonymous sources do have an agenda, isn't that obvious? Who would do something unethical (I doubt they are formally releasing classified information, then it would even be illegal.) unless they had some intention in mind? Pretending otherwise strikes me as incredibly naive. I am not saying such information is completely useless. E.g. in the days before the Iraq war, the German press would regularly double-check the new "information" coming from the US administration about Iraq's WMDs, and "usually well-informed intelligence sources" from the German BND would explain why that information was questionable. I guess in retrospect they weren't doing this anonymously because they were afraid of crossing their boss, but their bosses let them do this because , say, the head of the BND publicly announcing he didn't believe this information would have a bigger diplomatic fallout. But nevertheless, it should be taken with a big grain of salt.

I wonder what the actual holder was trying to accomplish by bidding 3♥ with that hand. Did he really think he was going to obstruct the 2♣ bidder? Or that he really wants a heart lead? If he passed quietly and then partner doubled to show a void, would there be any doubt about the lead? I admit it is tempting to bid 4H (depending on the colors) but 3H is absolutely normal.

Is there anyone who often opens at the one-level with a 7-5 and an ace and a king?

Yeah that's true, 4H is a better bid so that you can show 4 keycards and then show the HK obv. Well done. If you aren't going to play 7 ever after the 4S signoff (I agree) then why ask for the queen though? True. I guess I only thought about half my post.

Over 4♣, I would continued 4D-4H-4S-4N-5C-5D-6D-6S. South bids 4H as he would be happy if North takes over with 4N, and if he signs off in 4S that may also turn out to be helpful.. Then over 6D he knows North doesn't have any further extras, else he would have bid s.th. else rather than 4S.

I don't think your explanation makes look Fox any less stupid...

Does partner have a call over 4♠. He held ♠QJT6,♥T9,♦T96543,♣8 Certainly not.

I would take 4H as a good raise of spades. Not saying I am right, it's just that if I were responder that's how I would interpret it. And that's not what I would like to show with this hand.

South 100%, North 0%. Given South's hand, 3NT has no chance unless partner has a club stopper, or specifically ♥A and another trick (♠A or ♦Kxx). You bid 3NT because you think you can get 9 tricks before they can get 5, not because you have 18 hcp balanced. North's hand does look notrumpy to me, if partner suggests it so strongly.

I don't get this. Isn't double penalty here? Pass is forcing, so double is penalty. Are you playing this differently here because you need several ways to get to 3N?

Tyler, this is really not an A/E topic.

Generally, I would hope that posts or threads are not deleted because they offend a particular poster (or moderator, for that matter), but because they break rules. I would also appreciate clarification of these rules, given that I obviously don't understand them. Meanwhile, to get the focus a little off the moderators, I think the former forum poster "cherdano" (where did he go?) said s.th. untypically wise for him in this thread (paraphrased):

Well, I might have made 5 overtricks. P 1C 1S P.

Mike, 1NT non-forcing in a 2/1 GF context seems to be becoming quite common when playing 14-16 NT. When opener has a balanced hand that would accept an invitation, he has an easy solution, upgrade to a 1NT opening :unsure: Seriously, once you play 14-16 1NT the difference between semi-forcing (some weak bal hands pass) and non-forcing (all weak balanced hands pass) becomes very marginal. Of course, this is combined with 1M-3x = natural invite, and 1M-2♣ = natural or balanced, so the 1NT bid isn't all that different to BWS style.

I didn't know kenrexford is Kantar's pseudonym, now it all makes sense!!!

It takes about 3 posts to be certain. Oh, you mean when playing bridge?

Interesting, RHO having ♣JT under Justin's assumptions is 1.8 times as likely as LHO having ♣JT or ♦QJ. I wouldn't have thought it is so dramatic.

I hope partner does not have AJ9xxxx xxx xxx A! And if you remove a red card, I would hope he would not bid 3S with that hand!

I think your post captures the tradeoffs well. I have no strong conviction on whether it is superior to standard (especially at IMPs). I play what many play: X = 4 or 5 spades 1S = takeout or balanced without stopper 1N = nat 2m = nat, forcing 2H = 6+ spades, any strength 2S = mixed raise of m 3m = preemptive I think you come out a little on top - it is better for constructive auctions; and on competitive auctions you are sometimes at an advantage because you know responder has 6+ spades (or because responder can compete to 4S with 5-5 shape, having denied 6 spades), sometimes at a disadvantage (because you don't know whether he has 4 or 5). Overall, probably still a disadvantage in competitive auctions, but not such a big deal any more.

I agree that both contracts down is the most likely result. But the swing for that is smaller than the other outcomes, so I might still try 6♦. 5♠x down, 6♦x down = -200 v. +200 = -400 = -10 IMP 5♠x down, 6♦x makes = +1540 v. +200 = +1340 = +16 IMP 5♠x makes, 6♦x down = -200 v. -850 = +650 = +12 IMP 5♠x makes, 6♦x makes = +1540 v. -850 = +2220 = +20 IMP So I figure break even is when both fail about 60% of the time. Looking at my hand, is both failing more than 60% likely? I'm not so sure. Righty did open, so opponents are not necessarily sacrificing. And partner bid 5♦ freely missing the AK, so he must have outside values. Nobody else seems to agree though, am I just way wrong? You ignore the fact that 5♠ may be down more than one. I disagree that partner needs to have much of outside values (and the fact that LHO opened, missing one or two spade honors, makes it quite likely that he has an outside ace). I do think that both 5♠ and 6♦ will fail more than 60% of the time.

I don't get this line. It seems to me declarer is always making on this return if he has the ♦K and doesn't misguess. We have to come down to ♠Tx ♦AT, so declarer comes down to ♠J ♦Kxx and plays a diamond up. I haven't thought through it but my current guess is to duck the spade.