masse24

1NT - 2♣ 2♥ - 3♦1 3♥2 - 4♦3 4♠4 - 4NT5 5♠ - 5NT 6♣ - 7♦ 1. Showing 4 ♠ and 5+ ♦ 2. I have five ♥ 3. Six+ ♦, slammy 4. Okay, ♦ are fine--here is a ♠ control 5. RKC -- etc.

If it's known that 1NT can be opened with a 5 card major, I might interpret 3♥ as showing a 5th ♥, rather than agreeing ♦.

Duplicate.

Randy Johnson shows what happens when a bird is hit by a 100mph fastball. Poof!.

How would you feel if you played for the drop and the Queen did not appear?

Leading the Jack to show the Jack eliminates any ambiguity! ;)

Move to the country.

Timo, I am truly sorry to hear of your loss. Please accept my condolences.

Deleted nonsense. Did not see it was GIB.

I like a 4♥ Last Train, if available. If not, sitting North, I would think a bit longer and probably still make a move. North owns this one.

Already posted--four days ago--as a BW bidding poll here: Pass or Double? Pass is currently running at 96%.

FYP

Though I would always lead the ♥T on this auction, the trump lead is not horrible. However, the double, in my opinion, is incomprehensible--making it the worst "mistake" on the hand.

I'm still trying to figure out why Double was even on your radar--with the preempt?

Hand 1 Not sure I want to be in slam here. Looks like a tad under 50% to land both ♥ honors. However, if I must find the slam, I probably get there this way . . . P -- 1♠ 1NT - 3♥1 4♦2 - 4♠3 4NT4- 6♦5 6♥6 - P 1) Game-Force 2) Control, agrees ♥ 3) Control (can be A or K under keycard ask) 4) RKCB 5) Odd # keys ♦ void 6) Cross fingers. Rub lucky rabbits foot. Pray for luck. I open this 1♠ . . . all day.

A) Sign-Off

A frequent occurrence? A possible solution might be to adhere to more standard bidding practices. You might consider it.

Is this the "Voice of Thunder" 2♠ I've heard so much about? :D

Yes, I have. And just to confirm, I read through all the posts again. I do not see this widespread "resistance" to the 22 point acknowledgement you perceive. Instead, I see widespread pushback to the idea of opening 2♣. Nevertheless, you continued with your attempt to convince everyone that 22 points and 4 LTC equated to a 2♣ opener. You may get agreement on that--sometimes. But not always! :) The posts closest to a "resistance to 22" were Yeti's posts #19: "22 with every possible addition is NOT a 2♣ opener" and #21: "A random 22 point hand is NOT a 2♣ opener for most people." Hardly resistance. Instead, he only states what others have opined, it's not a 2♣ opener. And as I stated earlier, I believe this perceived "resistance" is due to your conflation with possession of a 22 point hand and no more than 4 LTC with some sort of "rule" to open 2♣. Based on the wording of your posts, that was my inference. However, it seems as though you have come around. Somewhat. At least, your stance seems less strident since some of the outside information has come in. In the end, what's most important, is as Vampyr stated, to "have whatever agreements you want with your partners."

Once again, you are conflating a 22 point hand with a 2♣ opener. Can they be opened 2♣? Certainly. Must they? Heck no! Also, your statement concerning "the collective's" understanding of length ("This is the resistence to new ideas....the length points!") is a strawman. Everyone understands it, but the resultant re-evaluation" of the hand does not push it over the 2♣ threshold. Moreover, please recall your earlier, initial responses: "East should be first to bid. From [a] Losing Trick perspective, he has exactly 4 losers in his hand.As such he has a royal hand and must sound the trumpets. roll out the carpet, and open up 2 ♣ to put his partner on official notice that he has a potential barn burner that warrants an game ending contract." "I know a game holding hand when I see one. I recognize the uniform. If I have no more than 4 losers in my hand....2 ♣ it is." "Nope...2 club open....has no more than 4 losers per LTC! See explanation that justifies the 2 club opening." "As stated, the adjusted value of the hand with length points and suit quality points is 22 hcp and the LTC is no more than 4 losers so 2♣ it is for me." So, when you subsequently state, "If Marty's hand evaluation says 22 points, that makes it 2 club ELIGIBLE. Notice, I said eligible, not a victor. We need to see if other tools shed light on the hand's true nature before if it makes the final cut," you are contradicting yourself. Interesting. And as far as Kaplan not being here, well, no. But just to confirm Bergen's thinking--hey you brought him up--I emailed Marty. He responded. And, as stated earlier, Marty Bergen opens this 1♦.

The problem here seems to be that you are somehow conflating hand evaluation methods and the resulting point counts (e.g. Bergen=22, K&R=22.3) with some sort of “with 22 points and a LTC of 4 (or less) you should open 2 clubs” rule. If so, this is rather rigid thinking. Think beyond the “points.” Personally, I would open 1♦. Would 2♣ cross my mind? Yes, for a nanosecond. But I would reject it. There are reasons for the overwhelming majority of the BW poll (currently running at 96%) choosing 1♦. Some of which are: • A space issue. Describing and sorting out your hand shape is difficult when you give up an entire level of bidding. • In addition to LTC, you need winners. Minor suit games require more than major suit games. • The resultant issue with a 2♣ – 2♦ – 3♦ start (2♦ being the most prevalent response). It’s awkward. So . . . once a hand evaluation (before opening) is performed, a bit of foresight should be applied. Questions such as “What will my rebid be?” – “What is the most likely response?” and “How will the auction progress?” should be asked. For these reasons, your insistence on showing us links to hand evaluation methods is puzzling. We are all aware of them. G-O-O-G-L-E is not difficult to spell. As I suggested above, think beyond the points. Finally, although this is a 22 point hand using "Bergen Points," even Marty Bergen would not open this 2♣. He would open it 1♦.

Yep. A red herring. Clouding the issue. A diversion. Or, since Bergen Raises refer to response methods over one-of-a-Major opening . . . maybe there is a hidden suggestion to open East 1♠?

The ACBL site is a wonderful primer to teach fledgling students of the game on day-one. Important matters such as--you know--how many cards you are dealt, and the fact you have a partner. Meanwhile, for those who stick it out to day-two . . .

Strangely . . . and significantly, we have yet to hear commentary from Redspawn about the know-nothings who voted here to open 1♦. Among the 1♦ bidders are at least 9 or 10 national caliber and world class players. Remarkably, there are still only two who think this is a 2♣ open, totaling a whopping majority (well, not quite a majority) of 3%. Apparently the 1♦ bidders did not get the memo on hand assessment and bidding theory. Had they attended the Redspawn Academy of Metaphorical Hyperbole they would know that (and I quote): "he has a royal hand" "and must sound the trumpets." "roll out the carpet," "and open up 2 ♣ to put his partner on official notice" "that he has a potential barn burner that warrants [a] game ending contract." I am curious, Redspawn, does the thought ever cross your mind that maybe--just maybe--others may know more than you? And maybe--just maybe--choosing a 3% action when world-class players (who are choosing an action diametrically opposed to yours) is an opportunity to enlighten yourself? To figure out exactly why your thinking is different than theirs? If not, then it appears as though your knowledge of the game has crystallized at its current level. Which is good. Because, quite frankly, it's very entertaining! :D

They actually did not "change the name." They reverted back to the original name, Birthright, which is what Kokish first named it.