pooltuna

I have no problem alerting MY CALLS when I have an agreement or an implicit agreement. I do have problems alerting an "expert standard" when I make a call. I think I am more inclined to give my version of what "expert standard" is and it may be in diagreement with partner's version. Consequently when an "expert standard" needs to be explained it needs to come from the partner of the person who made the call. That way everyone is on the same page not necessarily on same page with me. IMO this does NOT constitute misinformation as there is no firm agreement in place.

I suspect BBO has no way to distinguish between a crash caused by an ISP, your computer, or by you forcing a shutdown. So yes it is a measure of how much you crash if you never leave a hand or tournament voluntarily. Nevertheless with directors setting tournament levels at 75 or 80 % they are catching the runners and effectively have to provide subs for the real crashes.

They are all DSIP

You need to be able to differentiate between a holding like ♠ AQxx ♥ ATxx ♦ x ♣ Jxxx and the actual hand. Tactically I think the splinter with the hand in the previous sentence is better because partner will not have to make a questionable slam decision with so little space and it is potentially more costly for the opps to try to guess at the 4 level than the 3 level whether to venture a sac.

North should just grit his teeth and bid 4♠ that is what you do when you hold a limit raise in a competitive auction and have no easy way to show it. It would be useful if you could use unusual/unusual here but I suspect you need the minor that the Michael's caller does not have as natural.

This is a playful reply used instead of the more often expected "I resent that remark"

if you can stand it give partner a chance to find a reopening X. If he cannot you are probably not missing a game. Didn't check closely but assumed this is IMPS. At MP you probably have to grit your teeth and bid 3NT

play for 4-2 or better ♣ this requires that you ruff the 3rd♣ with the Q b4 using the K ♠ as an entry to ruff the 4th ♣

among 4153, 4063, 4054, 4162

pass; following the no preempts over a preempt principle.

AMEN

2♠ for all 3 ranges

I would be happy to play my most regular partner does not post. I would think length would depend on how many teams are participating. I would prefer one 16-bd segment/day with no barometer. Probably best to let each pair of teams schedule within a 2-day timeframe allowing for 32 teams to determine a winner over the whole 10 days

A suit that will set up immediately with a ♣ entry

Aren't west's actions over the presumably Multi 2♦ most consistent with 3♠ which we know he has and 1 or 2♥ rather than 3 or more ♥? Consequently it appears RHO has 3 or 4 ♥ and 6 ♠ so play the hand on that assumption.

Not for a dog walker. :)

Well if you are one of those who auto raises to 2 with any holding that includes 4+ ♠ you are pretty constrained to bidding 2♦. If instead you require xtra values for a 2♠ call then 2♠ is a possibility as opposite a 5 card suit with a modicum values you will have game chances. This is no guarantee that your partner is not playing a 33 fit or a 43 fit but you are not down yet and with a 43 fit the short hand takes the ♦ hits.

while ducking the ♥Q to get your squeeze count is a consideration so is keeping the 4th ♥ as a throw in card. Consequently I am inclined to win the A♥ and lead a ♣ for discovery purposes.

we have a game IMO if we can get partner to raise ♠ so start with a 1♠ call. The chances for a ♣ game are more distant because finding a fit will be harder and you need 11 tricks

general amen! but what are you doing over 4♠ besides saying "YUCK" or some phonetical near equivalent :)

This is why Lloyd's of London is my insurer. Pop that ♦A now! This is why I get relatively low rates :)

That's easy ♠AKT98 ♥AQT ♦AT9 ♣AT is 6NT and ♠KQJ ♥KQJ2 ♦KQJ ♣Q32 is pass :lol: that is the difference between having 20 or 21 and 11 or 12 :)

While I certainly prefer to overcall in these situations this may be the exception where an initial pass over 1 ♦ is best.

WHAT!!! YOU MEAN WE ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE HCP AND DEFENSIVE VALUES FOR A TOX...HOW SHOCKING!!!!!! AND PARTNER HOW IS HE A PROBLEM AFTER ALL I BID HIS HAND FOR HIM :) If I chose not to pass I would bid 2♦ rather than 1... hmmm let me think about 3 ♦ :)

I hate opening a hand without some defense so in this case if I cannot back in I start with a weak 2♦. Planning on bidding 2♠ on an auction like ...(P) P 2♥. Or assuming the opps are V I will try 3♠ after a continuation like ... (2[he}) P (3[he}) :)