gordontd

I have to disagree with your tutor: any advantage that Acol may have relies on its ability to stop in part-scores on appropriate hands.

There is a school of thought that says fourth hand should always double when 2NT is passed around.

There was a high-level case a long time ago in which the auction went 2NT-3NT. 3NT by agreement showed five spades and four hearts, but was made without much thought and opener passed it despite having major suit fits. This was adjusted by a top-level TD on the basis that the pass was based on the UI that the 3NT call was fast.

I'd pass with most of the strong balanced hands of this type, expecting to get more at this vulnerability if partner re-opens with a double than from 3NT. Don't you ever get dealt 15-counts?

Wouldn't you pass with 4-4 in the majors?

It might be the dizzy heights of 4H or 5H if you do it on a much weaker hand than partner will expect.

You will miss one if partner has a weak 5-4. Unless you also play 2H now as non-forcing.

In the UK, where the article originated, those people can be counted on one hand.

This reminds me of a ruling hand I had about 10 years ago. A pair had a long and complex relay auction to end up in 6S. The person on lead wondered which of his two aces he should try to cash. The answer was neither, the only defence to beat the slam was to lead his singleton trump to his partner's Ace after which partner needed to play another trump. There was misinformation and the person on lead tried to argue that with the proper information he might have led a trump. I was not persuaded, having polled a few appropriate people.

... to be followed by revokes and insufficient bids. Then we can get back to real directing. :)

I don't think it's you who should treat this as a learning experience.

While it might be North's fault that they missed game, I don't think South's 4C bid could be said to be bidding perfectly.

I've had a number of recent reports of impossible results being assigned when play is curtailed. Has something changed about how this is done in the last week or two?

And how would you do the assignments?

I'm sure you will understand I'm not being rude if I say that I don't think the way you do something is indicative of what is standard in the UK :)

That's not my impression, though I'm prepared to be shown to be wrong. I think it's quite common for two-level advances to be non-forcing but constructive.

Indeed so. I think it would have been more productive to ask about responder's actions and hand evaluation.

I'm not sure in what way b & c are different - I would expect anyone who chose one of them to choose the other too. I don't think the hand is worth an upgrade, largely due to the SJx.

gordontd - shubov 30 - 53 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ee00d11a.3b3d.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1607642273&u=gordontd

gordontd - hrothgar 12 - 33 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:66c981b8.3d63.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1607878270&u=gordontd

gordontd - shuba 44 - 26 https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:6fccfcf8.3b42.11eb.94ca.0cc47a39aeb4-1607644209&u=gordontd

If you don't blast 4NT, how do you distinguish between the various relevant hands?

Really?

This is not true under the 2017 laws and indeed was not entirely true under those introduced in 2007.

That's true - I tend to forget it because it's so unlikely to matter, but I suppose it could in a multi-session event. Until 2007 it was less precisely required and I think was usually ignored for an offending side who got less than 40% on the session.