pooltuna

XX. Don't bother to tell me this is a horrible call I don't want to hear it. For me it is a tactical call that will help partner decide what to do with the hand when I bid some number of ♣

The solution is for those who think a 2♦ call should not be a reverse post some hands for opener which are screwed on this auction I will attempt[hv=s=sxxxhakdakxcxxxxx]133|100|[/hv] as an example for those who think it is a reverse to show how they will handle the hand. At this point I haven't put a lot of thought in to and so have not taken either side but to be fair I have an old fashioned view that suggests to me that it shows ♥ and a plan i.e. ♣ tolerance if no ♦.

"It doesn't leave me with any adequate retort unless I want to seem like some jerk who just insults people in ways that can't be backed up." The irony is overwhelming. :P If only you could see the actual reason why. Maybe I'm approaching this from the wrong angle since you continue to ignore my request. I need to make an accusation that would force you to reveal your bridge abilities in order to defend yourself. You stink at bridge. Go! Challenge him to a match either against set teams or in the money games with the bots located here on BBO for some reasonable amount. By all means publish the time of the event so witnesses are clearly available. From what I have seen GL and get rich :)

I suggest you have a look at past posts debating exactly the semantics of this question. speaking of tactical bidding why is 5♣ the tactical bid but not 4NT. After all it's not like the opponents are NV against us being V with partner being screwed with a hand like[hv=s=shakqxdaxxcak9876]133|100|[/hv]

At these colors it is hard for me to imagine partner having a 5♣ hand holding at best ♣AK9876 that doesn't have a shot at seven so pass in not an LA IMO.

Looks like a sound argument to me which is why I would lead a ♠. The ♦ lead would be more attractive had partner never had an opportunity to X ♦s (at the other table maybe?). But I would not get adamant about any particular lead certainly not enough to argue that it was clearcut.

might this be a negative X that was unwilling to X 3♥ for penalties or maybe the X of 3♥ was a negative X as well

take a shot at 5♦ defensive prospects of 4♠ don't look good if partner is busted. So try and sac or try to drive them to 5

Would you really pass out 2♥? That's also quite a small target. no but I wouldn't punish partner with 3♥ either

I always manage to get RHO holding [hv=s=sk98xxxhxxxdxxxcx]133|100|unless I finesse ♣ then he holds the K[/hv] but it is hard to imagine not playing for the drop :rolleyes:

The 2 Cuties (JDonn and PhanthomSac(formerly known as jlall)) et al

had a similar problem this morning when I held[hv=d=e&v=b&s=sq8hakqjxda10xcak8]133|100|Scoring: IMP RHO opens 4♣[/hv]RHO dealt and opened 2♥ I elected for the X and 3NT rebid Consequently I would X and rebid 4NT if partners chooses not to pass

Dble. I prefer not to put partner under too much pressure to respond to my overcalls and I prefer to keep the range of values for an overcall as small as possible. Over 1NT I will now venture 2♠

Helene_T et al

ah ha a sane evaluation that doesn't ignor(why is spell check on for this word) the previous bidding!

Only if my avatar was wearing a mask :(

I see nothing else past ..... Edit: jdonn

I thought that was the idea :)

gnasher et al

Why? Is the TOXer in the first auction going to pass my raise in the second? BTW I would probably be going down 2 in the first auction (incomplete since it did not include my 4♠ bid) :)

1000%! As partner did not just raise ♥s I would bid 2♠

Clearly it is a miner issue you just need to dig deeper No, the suit is clubs. That makes it a "minor" issue. you'll have to card them to prove that and before you let them in the game.

Clearly it is a miner issue you just need to dig deeper

Jlall !

4♥