pooltuna

Might there be something in the Java version that increases the likelyhood of mismousing? Recently picking up cards has become more flaky. Did someone mess with the program that handles that...er improve the java version in that area?

2♥

INT may produce from partner a ♥ or a ♦ call and with a ♣ call we can always bail with a minimal ♠ call

Now partner makes a preference for ♥'s now 3♠

well my gut reaction is that low to the ♠Q is automatic

I agree with you. As for your other remarks I really thought I hadn't been posting enought but guess I was wrong ;)

what! a voice of reason in the wilderness!!!

So What if these guys are major overbidders. This particular forum is about soccer!! ;)

Well not knowing squat should have an even more negative impact as I don't know and really don't want to take the time to look up the quad standings. 33) 0 34) 1 35) 2 36) 2 37) 2 38) 1 39) 2 40) 0 41) 2 42) 0 43) 0 44) 2 45) 2 46) 0 47) 0 48) 0

I would report my "pass" button as broken to BBO if I can only make a bid ;)

'obv I'd double, not bid 2♥' ;) Not sure I understand 2NT. Does that mean I can make a game try in ♣ but pass 3♦ or bid 3♠/3♦ (not that I'd want to in this case)? If so I think the Michael's partner should start with 2NT just to prep a sacrifice if partner's minor is ♣.

6♦ I do have a lot more values than I could have

both the Java version and the Windows version kept putting me into a tournament where the director would not start rounds in a timely method (we reached -9 on the round clock at least that is what I recall). LET MY PEOPLE GO!!!!!!!!!!

you mean they played their benchwarmers? :) Who after all have a lot of practice :)

you've been reading a lot of Vernor Vinge's works I see :D

I pick a major over ♦ because the opps made no effort to investigate a major fit. In spite of the school that says it is anti%age to under lead Axxx I lead an x of ♥ because the T is promotable plus the ♠ spots really vacuum quite well.

Q1] Only by agreement, certainly not standard as this will require major modification to your overall bidding structure to avoid getting screwed on a lot of other hands. Q2] 4♠ seems to be the most logical choice IMO. A splinter call should not have an ace as the ace is more useful in long suits where it will help generate some of the 12+ tricks you need for slam. Q3] does not apply but I would not

I agree with Pran and disagree with JDonn et al. Here, the original poster specified that the partnership understanding about 3♦ is two-way. The alternative meanings are quite different: Either a long suit trial bid for game Or a cue-bid for slam. I don't believe I ever said that 3♦ is a 2 way bid. 3♦ is a game try, only after we bid on after partners sign off is it apparent that 3♦ was a cue bid or something other than a pure game try. There must be many situations where the meaning of a bid can be altered by subsequent bidding and I don't agree that an explantion should be offered in this case. You mean we can assume the opponents are supposed to be able to use logical thought processes!!!! and we aren't required to assume they are idiots? :lol: In other words if we make a game try and partner declines but we bid game anyway they are supposed logically deduce that our "game try" was actually a "slam try". So that all we have to alert is the "game try" :)

now try to figure out a logical reason for a what call to make IMO the first is pick a slam and the second is Josephine.

Q1] Only by agreement, certainly not standard as this will require major modification to your TOX structure to avoid getting screwed on more common hands. Q2] 2♦ seems to be the most logical choice IMO.

Fortunately there are only 10,455,016 of these 10-card suit hands so you won't have to deal with them often. Certainly not often enough to modify your bidding system in any major way. So we should just try to compute the approximate odds of making a slam and if appropriate bid it now. Since partner holding either the A or K of ♦ looks like the most critical item I would go with the probablility of partner holding one; i.e. 55%. So my call would be 6♠

Dog scratching at the door to get out?

Well I am not leading a singleton trump and pretty much set against leading the Ace so I lead from the longest suit which holds a Q. :)

Iindeed that is why your chance to get one of the four 13-card suit hands is so slim and your odds really do not improve much to get one of the 1,872 12-card suit hands or 231,192 11-card suit hands, or 10,455,016 10-card suit hands. And why the 9 (235,237,860), 8 (2,963,997,036), and 7 (22,394,644,272) card suits aren't all that common. This of course assumes I did my arithmetic correctly. :P

An ugly situation indeed. Choices look to be a 4th best ♣(or whatever your standard ♣ lead is), a ♥ return, or a 4th best ♠(or whatever your standard ♠ lead is). A ♥ return looks like it requires first for partner to have a 5 card suit. This is far from certain in spite of the missing ♥2. A good declarer holding xy42 will play the 4 to keep the waters muddy for our side. Secondly his suit will have to be headed by either JT or QT. With the former of course he might have started with the J. With a ♣ return we are putting all our eggs in one basket but unlike the ♥ return he only needs one important card, the A. Of course he has to not only have it but a second one as well to return the lead otherwise we won't set declarer. With a ♠ lead partner will need to hold 4 to the Q because our spots are so bad and a ♦ or ♣ stop. All in all I think we ought to lead a ♣ because it requires less than the others. But if we want to win the post mortem you need to lead a ♥ :P