cherdanno

But that is not what should happen with the current stop card regs. You make a skip bid; you use the stop card; you wait ten seconds (looking at your watch, if you like); you take the stop card away; they pass. That's incorrect as far as ACBL regulations are concerned. I don't think it changes anything anyway - those who would spend 10 seconds looking at their watch find other ways of making it obvious they aren't thinking if you change the rules. That's at least my experience from playing under such regulations.

I kind of like 4♦. I think its better than 3♦.

True. Instead you can tell them to wait 10 seconds, and they will do so, looking at their watch for 9 seconds, grabbing the pass card, waiting another second, and putting it on the table.

Can someone explain this post? Yes. In fact, someone already did.

what? was this sarcasm? mike can speak for himself, but i think he was serious... i don't know anybody who is *not* for helping the starving poor (or young, or old, or anyone else) You mean, as long as it doesn't cost money? Or are you in favor of raising taxes?

Don't you have spots in Holland? I bid 3♠, mixed raise, if we play that of course. I guess 4♠ otherwise.

You sure have great spots in Holland. 3♥ for me.

I am ashamed I didn't realize this myself. Of course, he has been awarded the Nobel prize for this.

That's what I think all the time, but usually I get disappointed!

I also usually have two methods of giving choice-of-game between 4M in a 5-3 fit and 3N, and I would use it on gnasher's hand. Adam's is of course right that it is easy to construct hands where 5♦ is the right contract, but that's also completely besides the point. The point is that they are not frequent, and on the other hand partner will sometimes be wrong to bypass 3N when he doesn't know we have a stopper help with a singleton honor.

Btw, there is another reason to bid 1N, rather than 2N: GIB is more likely to misdefend if we claim to have 10 hcp or less. Edit: Oh, Phil mentioned in fact that this happened!

Amazing that 40% of declarer pulled trump instead of setting up a ruff. How could this happen, on BBO??

If I had to make a rationale for hate-crime laws, it would go s.th. like this: If you commit a violent crime, you are punished for the injuries and pain you caused your victim. But a crime against, say, someone of a minority race, that is motivated by racism and intended to scare other people of the same race has more victims - anyone of that race who now lives in fear. So you intentionally cause more harm, and so a bigger punishment makes sense, too.

I had a team game where for one set, my counterpart at the other table clearly wasn't shuffling the cards before putting them back. Would you still call the TD? Would it have been ethical to draw inferences from the sorted cards?

See Winston? That's what you get for using the f-word.

LOL

LOL

ROTFL

I assume you are bidding 3N? Btw, if I can really the best continuation I can wish for this hand, I would ask for the number of hearts with 2♣, play 2♥ opposite 2, and 3N opposite 3+ :o

Bluejak's style is unusual enough in the ACBL that I think it is very clear you should alert it, whether the regulations explicitly call for it or not. It is not "the modern style" to bid with such a hand. I have seen 8 hcp 2-level overcalls with a AKJxxxx suit, or with a nice 9-count and 64 shape, but a 6-count with a 5-card suit is clearly beyond the normal variation in style. (Heck, I am sure you could find plenty of TDs who would ask you to alert when you overcall at the ONE level with this hand.) Also, if you really overcall 2♣ with this hand, then either our judgment about suitability for overcalls differs a lot from mine, or you DO overcall frequently with less than 10 hcp.

I find this kind of statement hard to understand, and find it surprising coming from you, given that I always find your opinions reasonable (also when I disagree with them). The 9/11 attacks were planned in ... Hamburg. The 9/11 pilots got their training in ... Florida. Did you consider it obvious to invade Germany and Florida? Whether having training camps in Afghanistan was essential for these attacks is hardly clear. After 9/11, the things I found obvious to do were things like "try to have more Arab speakers in the CIA, in the FBI", "find out what went wrong within the intelligence community", "pressure other states into doing everything to cut off the money flow to terrorists, to strengthen their law enforcement". Launching a war - that would certinaly cost many more lives than 9/11, and possible more American lives, - because the government of a state sympathized with the terrorists, and hosted some of their friends is never something I can find "blatantly obvious", even when it turns out the right thing to do.

so after P P X P are you ready to pass? Yes because partner wanted to double TWO diamonds and is stil doubling them into game after hearing a raise! He expects me to have a bad hand with a diamond void! How do you know in deed and how many do you expect 3 ♦ to go down? The fact that partner passed 2♦ does not guarantee he wanted to pass a reopening DBL from you. In fact if you would give this sequence to people without this prior discussion and the diamond void in your hand, I doubt that most would interpret this as a penalty double in the first place after the raise. And even if it would be a clearcut penalty double. which an auction where opponents have raised each other rarely is at the part-score level: Partner may infer that you are short, but he may still not expect you to be void (which is a big difference) and he will certainly not expect that you have no aces and his shortage in spades may not even help him to get ruffs or spade tricks for the defense. All indications are that 3♦ will be very close to making, particularly after the DBL reveals the trump break to a competent declarer. This is really wrong. First of all, this is a 100% clear-cut penalty double. It shows partner wanted to make a penalty pass at the two-level, despite having values. He has 5 diamonds, and not Qxxxx. Even if you think 3♦ might be making, how on earth can you expect 4♣ to do well? It is most likely a 4-3 fit (I think partner's most likely shape is 2353), it could be a 4-2 fit. Yes we have a void, but it would be the long hand ruffing, and opposite wastage in partner's hand (he has good diamonds). If 3♦ is making, then 4♣X is probably 3 or 4 down. More likely, both contracts are 1 to 3 down.

Ok, here is the best reaction I have seen so far: from a state department spokesperson:

From a commentary on tagesschau.de (the news website of one of the main TV stations in Germany): "Obama, who dreams of a nuclear free world, of piece in the Middle East, of a relation with the Islamic world built on mutual inspiration and respect. (...) Someone, who even wants to work with the Republicans..."

I think you can just agree that - responder will always rebid 2♠, - all of opener's rebids are natural, with a non-2N rerebid implying a heart suit, - and a 3♥ rerebid being GF and it will work out ok. You probably have bigger worries anyway given you play control responses to 2♣ <_<