jjbrr

nothing is more tilting than slow players in a speedball. i suggest killing them with fire, witch trial style. i suspect im in the minority.

Jones would be epic if she was hot. alas ;)

I'd be shocked if current expert standard is theoretically inferior to anything currently played. michaels seems fine. I'd be eager to learn, though.

fwiw i have no agreements with anyone about these bids. obv if dbl or 3♣ shows majors, thats the best, but 3♠ then pass seems totally reasonable here.

6♣. I expect 12 tricks in clubs a huge majority of the time. Huge.

pass over this. i'd bid grand over 6♣ and i dont think its close.

I'd bid 4♥ at the table. If you have some other agreement about the specific hand this shows, I don't know what to tell you. Ya, obv it sucks jumping so much, but I don't feel comfortable bidding anything else.

Also, Happy Birthday, Aberlour!

make the Z pointy and the 2 roundy obv

I'll tell you in hidden text. Then it's your choice if you want to read it or not :)

Bump for lurkers

I'm pretty sure I wouldnt get to slam. 1♥ 1♠ 2♦ 3♣ 3NT might end the auction for me. I think 4N over 1♥ is completely nuts.

michaels then bid game

fit jump.

While the results on this hand were a bit ridiculous, I don't think it has anything to do with the convention. 1♦ 1♠ 1NT 2♦ 2♥ 3♦ is perfectly normal, but after that it's still 12 opposite 15 with no extra trump length and no shortness. I don't think it's easy by any stretch of the imagination to get to 6♦, and it's not even clear you want to be there. Obv on the actual hand you wanted to be in 6♦ with Jx of ♠ onside and trumps split (I think? I don't remember) but otherwise I would expect 3NT to be the normal contract.

paging jdonn: reason # 1371 to play strong club.

Ya this is just a crapshoot now. I'd pass and go plus.

I agree. I would like to see penalties assessed to people who can't take the few minutes it takes to fill in their CC. Seems like it should be a simple thing and there's no excuse for not doing it. Of course, then we'd have threads about how so and so is pathetic for calling the director about it.

Because the first paragraph is just wrong, unless you want to argue that "standard procedure by players" means the same thing as "ACBL sanctioned correct procedures." While the standard procedure is and should be the correct procedure most of the time, I think you'll agree it's not always true. Even if the first paragraph were true, the second paragraph doesn't add anything to the discussion. Regional pairs 12 years ago != elite events today. But it begs the question of why this isn't in the law forum, which I believe I already addressed as well.

Is it legal to play a convention that allows you to uncover a singleton in the NT opener's hand (at least in the US)?

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/2140/77369899.png Cracking open my collection of cats in silly hats ldo.

Excellent thread title. I'd call this bad trumps, good hand but I think it's close to bad hand.

That poll is tl;dr. 3m should be 4 trumps, max, and whatever else you want. worthless doubleton, useful doubleton, values, something else, whatever. Don't split hairs over this imo.

In my style 3♦ wouldn't deny 4♠. Partner could have a hand with lots of ♦ that's too weak for a neg dbl. So I like all the actions you took if you're playing my style. If 3♦ denied 4♠, I'd try 5♦ over 3♥.

When I was like 14 and just starting to play competitive club soccer, my coach gave us a whole lesson one practice on how to sneakily grab a part of the opponent's shorts when there's a corner kick so that if they jump their shorts would be tugged down and they might be more reluctant to jump next time (!?). He was an ex-pro. oleeeeeeeee