pooltuna

I prefer 3♠ to 4♠ not that 4♠ causes me a lot of heartburn. One advantage to 3♠ is that you generally have about this HCP when you call at the 3 level and partner will not get overexcited plus he may be able to call 3NT which rates to play reasonably well.

I would go with South, the Jacoby bidder, as most at fault. Although I don't know what agreements the pair has about the 3♠ call

As long as I follow the rules for playing a card (i.e. I follow suit with any card I have in the led suit otherwise I may discard ANY card in my hand.) why does the ACBL care if I assign meanings to said card as long as the opponents can be aware of agreements regarding such a play. Essentially this is unenforcable and relies on the ethicallity of the defenders involved. Consequently it seems my ethics with regard to this are the opponents are entitled to know what I mean by the play not what I have. If I can encrypt the meaning tough cookies, opp! all you are entitled to know is the encryption method. Again this is essentially unenforcable and attempting to restrict my card play is buffalo chips.

1] 1♦....do your duty :) 2] X 3] no

1]moderate improvement so 3♠ is probably a better choice than 2♠ because 2♠ could be a call with about a K less playing value. After all what would you do with ♠xxxx ♥AQx ♦ AJxx ♣Jx, pass??? 2a] If you have it, you have to use it, otherwise you're denying a hand that could. 2b] my problem with 4♠now, is partner has already expressed a preference, he may only hold marginal values including offensively wasteful ♥ holdings, plus he may only have 4♠. 3] well for me X shows a bigger hand than an X of 1♥ plus the 2♥ call will put a lot of pressure on E making a penalty X more difficult. So yes 4♠

This is a simple restricted choice position. So yes you should come back to hand and lead the T planning on letting it ride. This is the %age play.

Stop playing NFB and call 3♦

Since when are your eponymic actions allowed on this forum? :)

Buffalo chips are an aromatic, prairie, energy source. :)

Superstars would be like Novas!! So we should call them something close to that. I know we can call them Novices :)

anti%age

PLEASE PARTNER REMEMBER TO PROTECT ME!!!!!

1) Pass 2) Yes I would open 1NT. Now I try 3♥ but I could certainly live with pass as we are NV 3) Pass 4) normally I would expect pass to show first round control of ♠ but I'm not sure I am in a FP situation so I think I have to whack

Let;s see if I understand this correctly! You're saying I am constrained on the card maybe the suit I can lead because of our implicit tendencies? My reaction to this is buffalo chips. The opponents are entitled to your lead agreements only!!!!

♠4 altho an argument could be made for any suit.

Yes I would pass. I prefer to hold a hand that would accept a 3♥ Limit Raise over my 2♥ call.

North needs to learn to bid like others of this universe. Of course that presumes they have the intellectual capacity to do so.

1. No overcall the risk part of risk/reward is too high at these colors 2. a]I think 3♦ would be more discouraging than 2NT so is appropriate b]How many times I am going to have to bid ♦ on this hand - 6♦ 3. At least 2♦X isn't game! Well I have done my best to keep a lid on partner but a Qbid here is pretty much free so I make it 5♣. Alternatively I could just take control and RKC into 6♥.

Are you speaking about the general bridge population? If so I would say not adequately

You must be 100% wrong because I am in complete agreement with you especially regarding how bad a 2♠ call could be when we actually want to encourage partner.

EDIT: thinking 2♠ shows a 6 card suit but probably not so 6♦ has a significantly reduced probability of going down

Not sure how many there are but I am with the passers

The Sun Also Rises!

A. 1♣ B. 1♣ C. 1♣ D. 1♦

is there still room on the bandwagon