pooltuna

That there are many hands that make slam is not the question. The question is do you have the bidding tools to differentiate the ones that make slam from the probably equally many (or more) hands that don't

Does that imply that normal stayman gives you the tools to check if 2NT opener is 5-4 in the majors? :) As long as responder has a 4 card major I fail to see the difficulties as the 2NT opener can both show the 5 carder then revert to the 4 carder over 3NT

5♥ ought to be fairly descriptive

well it is unclear exactly how the auction went altho I find it hard not to believe it went 1♠ (2♥) and it is now my turn.....SUPPORT WITH SUPPORT 2♠ or some equivalent is mandatory!

I agree obv but am too old to "man up" :)

agreed I would call 4♠ like everyone else but was trying to answer the OP's question

a desire to defend?

4♦...How are you going to get passed out in a qbid if you don't try?

well the choice look like 3NT or 4♣ [is anyone really going to play this as natural?]. 3NT is only a consideration because it is MP but IMO you need to qbid 4♣ and hope partner has a no wasted values singleton♦

1) 4NT 2) pass, usually better to let the opps play in their trump suit when it breaks 5-0 and do you really want partner trying to figure out what to bid when he holds 5♥ and no points 3) No

yeah but -200 is going to be a good score?

East for not Xing 1♥ and West for Xing 2♥

sorry but my tantō is in the shop being sharpened so I will stick with 2♠. Need some help here though I need a phrase similar in tone to "man up people" except it would be a euphemism for "get sane people" :) Han, We REALLY, REALLY need a simul for this hand :)

seems right to me too

doesn't need sugar coating when he is right :)

heh that was the first book I ever read. First book or first bridge book? Had you learned control or were you still wearing diapers? :)

yep they have broken 3-0 before but I suggest you kneel and beg Han to run a simul on this hand for you. :)

no fair egging the opponents on ...hmmm maybe spurring[horse whipping?] would be a better term :lol:

As I recall there is no benefit for bidding what at best a 50% slam [basically assuming a club void offsets Kxx♠ onside ]

I accept it as a necessary evil

you probably have the same number of ♠losers as the hand below so bid it the same xxxxx KJx xx xxx

I definitely think south would X if it went 2D X 5D at these colors. Also think 5D is insane at these colors heh. so 5♦ less 300=sanity? :) 2♦ 2♠ 3♦ 4♦ ;2♠ is marginal but necessary w/short ♦ P 4♥ P 5♣ ;4♥ is a courtesy Q P 5♠ P P ; 5♠ = you'll have to drag me any further while I kick and scream P

1) since it is MP 4♦ 2) pass 3) 3♥, time to goad the opps 4) you made your bed time to lie in it, pass 5) 2♦, for me 1NT promises 2♠

you get my vote Roland :)

Not sure that is accurate. What we want is to do what we think is best for BBO and its members. If and when someone figures out how to implement a rating system in such a way that we are confident it will be an improvement over what we have now (which we admit is far from perfect), I suspect we would implement it. I am not holding my breath waiting for this to happen. Note that I am not referring to finding a great method of computing player ratings. This is mostly about policies about when/where/how to display playing ratings. Fred Gitelman Bridge Base Inc. www.bridgebase.com Well if you want at least a smattering of a rating system why not set up a series of individual swiss tourneys where you can earn a "star" by total "placing points" in say 10 tournaments a month(well best 10 placements) but to keep it you have to repeat your performance every month