pooltuna

presentation still leaves me uncertain as to who is vulnerable but I would bid 5♣ in either case :) clearly not for the same reason.

a hopefully non-paranoid voice of sanity :)

Damn, I exceeded his paranoia level and set him off :blink:

oops

If I have to guess I guess 6♠

yeah I have a tough case too. If you assume it is your mother's then mine would be Dutch. If you assume it is your father's then mine would be English. Of course I spent my first 6 years in Venezuela (I speak Spanish fairly fluently but with a child's vocabulary) and I stopped speaking Dutch around the age of 3(and have no fluency). So I guess in fact my first language would be English(Americanized version)

I assume everything is natural so I prepare to pass

49)If no 0 then 1 50)1 51)2 this is only hope for an all English final? 52)2 this is only hope for an all North American final?

Congratulations our your strong resistance. If I had written it I am sure I wouldn't have been able to resist and I would have said "I don't know why you need to be so hogmatic about it."

Yes, as I believe most expert partnerships don't bash 3nt with those :) I may be influenced by polish bridge culture though as everybody here plays jumps to 3♥/3♠ to show those hands. in SAYC I believe 1NT (p) 3♥/3♠ are slam trys in those suits not singletons consequently these hands have to bash 3NT.

would that be a superaccept :)

white vs red; but for me not at these colors

X followed by 2♠ if partner runs

I chicken...er pass

this looks like the best argument so far for a ♣ lead

English is not my native language so maybe I needed a coma there. I wanted to say that responder has either 2-3♠, 2-3♥ without 8 card major or he has any 4-3-3-3 shape. Any English native speaker care to comment on meaning of my original sentence ? You seem to have eliminated the following holdings from the N hand 1345 1354 3145 3154

the only possibly satisfactory solution is for the BBO program to allow the sub to review all previous tricks up to the current one until they play to the current trick.

since you hadn't preempted already I suspect that bidding 4♠ might show a 2 suiter for the same reason. IMO double is to express an opinion that the opponents had made a mistake in the selection of their trump suit.

accept the transfer

I already do that! :huh: but not at you :)

I don't look at it that way. For a 5♦ call partner needs 8-9 tricks in hand to justify it we have either 2 or 4 so we rate to make anywhere between 10 and 13 tricks.

Partner bid 5♦ on the assumption that our negative double showed some ♠ and ♣ cards and we have a lot more that he should have expected. Do you not think he is bidding to make? IMO he was and missing 2 black aces I find it very unlikely that he has ♥ losers.

you mean the tortoise or slug option?

I think you mean the Flash version. I have noticed precisely the same problem. The area to click on a card to play it seems reduced. I am using the Chrome browser but I do know that the upgrade to Flash 10.1 occurred ten days ago, so this is possibly the root cause. Paul Yes probably the Flash version whatever the newest and worse but less server intensive version was. I try to use this because it is less server intensive but this reduction in ease of card selection is very irritating and consequently I will be using the Windows version much more frequently (hint hint).

you haven't had a tough overcall until you have to bid over 1♣ with ♠87653 ♥AK86 ♦K7 ♣KJ and I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ANY BUFFALO CHIPS ABOUT PASSING. :(