nigel_k

I can only assume that for some reason we decided to walk the dog when we opened 3♣. So the issue of partner being captain doesn't arise. I voted abstain but would guess to bid slam if I really had to choose something.

I play IJO when vulnerable. It should always be a good six card suit and the minimum strength should be tied to your minimum strength to double and then bid - a king less at the three level. E.g. if they open 1♥ and your minimum to double then bid 3♦ is Kx Ax AQJxxx Kx, then your minimum for an IJO should be the same hand without one of the kings. At the two level it can be slightly lighter as there is room to invite.

XX: Good four card club suit Pass: Weaker four card club suit or good three Otherwise make your normal rebid 3Cxx will make quite often when people are doubling on KQxxx and not much else, and they have nowhere to go. So it makes sense to try to punish them if you can. Actually, 3Cxx makes on this hand though the above method would not get you there.

2♥ ought to be constructive on this auction, though standard is probably for it to be weak. Something like 8-11 HCP with five hearts is reasonably common and it's more important to handle that type more than the weak one.

There is only an infraction if North had no bridge reason for the break in tempo. It would be hard to establish that here, especially if 3♠ was not always the choice at other tables. The laws don't deal very well with issues involving screens. It's not even entirely clear to me whether the amount of time the tray spends on the other side is UI or AI.

This is a poor analogy. Bridge doesn't have a dictionary, but it does have an Encyclopedia and I wouldn't be at all surprised if 'semi-forcing' is in there. However I wouldn't regard that decisive either way. If you have a term that is possibly imperfect but most people understand what it means, and there is no alternative that is anywhere near as concise, then it's fine to use that term until a better one comes along.

If South is 100% sure that his double shows this hand type and partner knows that, then it is a clear pass. But based on the hand North had for his 'penalty' double, clearly N/S were not that solid in their agreements. Possibly South suspected (without UI) that partner might expect a different hand for South's double. Then it is not so unreasonable to resolve the dilemma by choosing to believe the opponents.

Partner will picture at most the same heart suit in a 7222 shape. In practice, this hand will very often be a trick better than that because partner will have a stray queen or jack in a black suit that he doesn't consider very useful.

I disagree. Bridge is different from chess, go and other games. It just doesn't require the same level of pure, extended, concentrated brain power as those other games. It's almost like comparing marathon running with equestrian or lawn bowls. If a 15 year old and a 40 year old each spend ten years becoming as good as they possibly can, and all other factors are equal, it is pretty much a toss up as to who will be better at the end of the ten years. But certainly, if you have the natural talent to become a top expert, you will very likely get involved in the game before age 25. And if you don't start until 40, chances are you just won't have anywhere near as much free time to devote to the game as you did at 15.

Standards have slipped so badly that I have even heard some people now saying 'ice cream' instead of 'iced cream'.

I'm not familiar enough with the methods to be sure if this South hand qualifies for 3♦. Maybe it doesn't. But most of the blame is with North. After South bid 4♥, if North had passed 5♦ and South still could not do more than 5♥, how could slam be good?

I like this agreement too. The point is to separate the offensively oriented hands from the defensively oriented ones so that partner can decide what to do over 4♠. Most times the defensive ones will have three trumps and the offensive ones more than three trumps, but this is obviously an example that would bid 2NT despite only three trumps. Without that agreement I would bid 3♠ splinter. An extra trump would be ideal, but if we just bid 2♠ partner will not compete to 5♥ over 4♠ in many cases where it is right to do so. The cases where he would compete to 5♥ after we bid 3♠ but would be better to double, seem a lot less likely.

I vote non-forcing. You can make a decent case for it to be forcing because the 5♣ bidder is a passed hand, but then you have a large set of extra possible auctions where you need to make sure you are in agreement. In FP situations, it's much more important that both partners agree, than having the absolutely optimal agreement. I have no idea who North was, but 5♣ is horrible. It will never be a good save against game, and they may well not bid slam since they are already forced to guess at a high level. Or, opponents were maybe going to bid a failing slam but choose to take the 800 on offer. It won't be a huge gain even if they double and slam makes. It doesn't consume space either. The only possible excuse is that Larry Cohen is a good player and he told people explicitly to do this instead of trying to use their judgment.

If the double always has two four card suits, and both opponents have bid so your side is less likely to have game, and any unbid major is one that partner has already failed to overcall at the one level, and partner knows to respond appropriately, then I still don't like it but it might be playable.

If it's IMPs and 1NT will either make or go one off, I do want to send it back. No doubt there are hands where 1NT goes down but costs less than our best fit at the two level, but they just don't seem that common in my experience.

No, I am getting all the content but it is everything since March 17. It says 'There are 176 new entries since 2012-March-17' when I click View New Content, which is probably true, but I logged in less than 24 hours ago and it was on another computer and ISP so there can't be any caching issue.

I'm sure I have posted this at least twice before, but: XX Spades and another Bid Natural to play Pass Forces XX. Non-spade two suiter or strong When you have two suits, you nearly always end up in the best fit, which doesn't happen quite often with just a general scramble. When you have a spade fit, you get to 2♠ quickly and make it harder for them. Likewise a five card or longer suit is bid immediately so that they don't get extra turns to call and opener can raise it sometimes. The downside is that a weak 4333 has to be described as something else. I also agree that it's good to be able to play 1NT doubled at matchpoints, and I'm not sure you give up too much if you have a method that allows that. But I prefer the above at IMPs and don't want to play two different methods.

When reading the forums, I tend to use the 'view new content' link to see every thread that has been posted to since my last login. It has always worked well in the past. But now it seems to just give me every thread posted to since March 17, regardless of whether I have logged in and out since the last post of the thread. I have tried logging out, shutting down, using another computer but it just seems broken.

Basically agree with gnasher but I'm not sure about trying to ruff the third round of diamonds. How likely is it that East passed 1♦ with QJ98xx in hearts and a stiff spade? Against some people it might be quite possible but there are plenty of others where you can completely rule it out, especially if the club finesse loses. And West may well have led top from three or even some nonsense such as MUD. So I might play East for 1534.

The important point is gwnn's one about the number of tricks they can take in spades. How bad can it be to get +150 when the par is +100?

Totally agree with the OP. The shorter version is that the 1NT response includes invitational hands, so opener only passes hands that would not accept an invite.

The South hand is not an opening bid for me, though it is close. However I agree with 3♠. I might pass a minimum with four spades but not including a stiff club. The main problem is that North did too much, especially when partner bid under pressure and it's matchpoints.

2♦ as a weak two bid is highly underrated. I dislike 2NT as weak with minors, for the reasons bluecalm gave. Multi suffers from similar problems of being less preemptive and giving opponents an extra turn to call. Using 2♦ to show some kind of strong hand (whether 18-19 bal or something else) may be better but would require a lot of work to develop the continuations.

I don't think the strength of your opening bids should depend on whether you are playing 2/1 or standard. If responder chooses to force to game in 2/1 then they have a hand that would have continued to game anyway in standard. As far as the actual strength, it is normal to open a balanced hand with 12 HCP and pass a balanced hand with 11 HCP. Some people play a style where a balanced 11 is an opening bid, but that is not standard. With an unbalanced hand, it is normal to open many 11 HCP hands and some 10 HCP hands. If partner has a minimum game force and the hand is a complete misfit, you get too high and go down. But you gain in enough other cases to compensate for that.

I agree with Mike about responding 2♦ on South. Actually, I would suggest responding 2♦ on any hand where you intend to always bid slam and the only decisions are about strain and whether to bid grand. A positive is necessary when slam will depend on opener's strength and fit, because opener can only cooperate if they know responder has values. On the hand, obviously 2[DI[ doesn't solve all your problems. There will be hard decisions later. But you will have an extra round of bidding to help figure out what to do.