BillPatch

Firing squad first; comments later. 2nd position is the worst to deviate from the tried and true well defined preempts with strong offense-defense ratio(ODR). After the execution, read the comments, and drag yourself back to the beginner-novice area. Do not post another question up here for a week, or being shot will be the least of your worries. As far as I can recall all the ACBL Encyclopedias and all my books on preempts define 4NT as an asking bid, either for aces or key cards. Use whichever you normally use. Even my British preempt book agrees, so this treatment is probably common in acol land as well as ACBL land, the opinion of the previous Briton notwithstanding.

Both auctions began with the sequence 1 suit(pass) 1 suit (2 level major overcall) 3 level cue in that major A difference is that in OP the two level overcall was simple and in the new auction the overcall was a jump.

It should be considered a Western Q if your pair considers itself North American. An Eastern Q if your pair considers itself European. The inscrutable oriental does not give a clue as to how they play it. (I did not read the Chinese sig for clues.)

While the gambling NT is "standard", only about 50% of 2/1 bidders use it. While I use the convention in some partnerships, and consider its use here WTP in those pairings, impossible is a slight overstatement for the bridge world for those who use the convention.

If I were opener I would rebid 3♦ if my lho had not made the TO double. The double makes me suspect he has major values, so I still discount the ♠Q and just bid 2♦. The next round I would bid 3NT WTP? The TO double suggests 4 or less frequently 3 so they usually can run at most 4 hearts. 9 tricks in NT look as easy as 11 in diamonds. Would expect very few bidders to find the diamond slam. CTC scores 10 6♦, 10 5♦, 6 3NT, 1 partials. ATB 100% opener for final pass.

I don't understand the attraction of alternatives to the penalty double at this vulnerability at IMPs. Certainly if they sit it's the surest plus. Eve if game is on for our side down 2 vulnerable will often beat a NV game. Advancer will not often find a successful rescue in ♣, which is not probable. Possibly another case of the old observation in Punch. "It has been observed that in Britain that there are only two or three authorities on bridge. It is surprising how often I draw one of them for a partner."

Presumably a well written intentional understatement. An ordinary intermediate might find a winning play after dropping a quack by recognizing the application of the rule of restricted choice. Only a better intermediate is likely to find the counting play.

Responding to OP. 1. Since modern acol is typically played with the weak NT at any vulnerability, the 1♦ promises either extra strength or extra distribution, so with the normal minimum of 8 hcp, as specified in Bergen. Negative Doubles for Acol Players. ed. Tim Bourke. Not the same as Standard American. 2. I assume so. If you're willing to play the Moysian fit(4-3). Do not waste too much time trying to develop detailed understandings with partners who have not learned negative doubles. 3. If a player makes a negative double rather than the 2 over one there is the negative information that partner does not have 10 hcp and a 5 card suit.

3♦. 2♥ over emphasize the hand for major contracts, NT(I have only a fifth round stopper in ♠), and does not limit the hand, Pity if the only thing partner cares about is a heart stopper.

I think it is a toss-up between 4♠ and 5♦. With an aggressive preempter a spade void is less common, so the spade game is preferable. A more conservative preempter is more likely to have he strength to make five diamonds, and also is more likely to have the spade void. With North of the Master Solvers Club opposite, flip a coin.

I know my partners think I need more practice counting to 13, but this is ridiculous! Now both hands posted have 14 cards.

Wanting to show a heart fit is not a viable alternative; the opponent overcalled in hearts.

Game may be odds on declaring that hand, but it has 14 cards, and the opponent with 12 cards might notice in time. I would upvote the rest of your post,

Another reason for continuing to think about bidding alternatives when you have an automatic choice is that you want to bid in tempo, to avoid giving info from quick bid now, or a slower bid later because you failed to plan ahead.

Good typo catch! The answer to your question is that you are not beginner and bridge is a learned behavior. It appear that even a slightly higher level player such as Liversidge can have a blind spot, though from his comments we can see he is progressing well.

True. But I thought it more likely that I was replying to a real beginner, and in the spirit of the board I gave a basic reply. I considered explaining Negative Free Bids, but that is an intermediate treatment which would confuse the beginner. I plan to buy several translated bridge books by Polish authors this fall. Then I might be able to guess how to answer such a question from a Slavic player with a better background.

To teammates? If you bid like this and you were to win you will need to explain to the disciplinary authorities that you were not using a wire. Were you?

Gross overbids. Is everyone assuming we're 20 Imps down late in match?

EDIT: Responding to OP, not Free's post./Edit Yes, I can imagine bidding like that, late in a knockout down 20 imps. Though that hand is so good for play in hearts that if I were to shoot on that hand, I'd prefer 3♦ to 2♥. If partner does have the pancake hand the 5♣ contract may be biddable as a better shot since a bridge player would have moose to make a TO double over a preempt on a pancake hand without a stopper. (If I were playing my preferred methods I would be using lebensohl in which the 3♦ cue advance is a stopper ask, the second round cue after lebensohl would show the game force and specify 4 hearts, so I might shoot in that manner, but there my normal bid of lebensohl then 3♥ to make the game try since I could bid this suit at two level makes the shoot less often profitable.)

Sorry, Lovera. That hand diagram is too small. I could understand your Italian better than read the fine print, and I can only read that because I studied Spanish 40 years ago, and then my coursework was insufficient to meet my college foreign language requirements. I did get the BA at Columbia College, New York, through finishing 2nd year German. Unlike Zel, my computer skills are also rusty, and it is not easy for me to enlarge the screen that way. You post successfully well enough here and your experience with Youtube suggest that you are able to solve the technical problems at your end to repost the problem large enough for your audience.

You would pass a forcing bid. That is a rooky mistake. On the auction starting with a suit opening followed by a simple overcall a response in a new suit, a free bid, is unconditionally forcing. Therefore partner knows that he is aiming for higher contracts. It is his judgment that he needs more information from you to place the contract at a higher level. You do not know his hand. One peep from you with your minimum hand may give him the info needed for a successful grand, slam, game or part score. Unless you have committed a gross psych on a previous round, it is best to humor him. And I should suggest that at this stage of your bridge development, it is best to avoid psychs. While they are less likely to cause you to lose potential partners than the true rooky mistakes; they also reduce partnership trust. If you can fake that, you will know that you are a real bridge player. About the opening bid. Sure it is borderline. Even if in your judgment that opening on such cheese is poor bridge, it was definitely not a gross psych.

Deleted. Reading error. misread 1 lvl as 1 M. Apologies to gezes. I like your post.

No, I rebid 3♦ to show the diamond "suit". Most descriptive bid possible. And try not to have a sad face!

The current group of expert seniors over 65 contains many conservative sound opening bidders who remember the success of Roth-Stone derived methods probably include at least a few who continue to play matchpoints successfully, though now the team trials are open many of the top seniors compete in the main team trials, and if they ail to make that team, the senior team trials. Much of the rest of the year they concentrate on teams to improve their chances in these events. The great success of the ACBL in promoting the swiss team games, KO's and mini-KO's provides more master points to the next echelon of seniors than the less well attended pair games.

There is a reason that I can afford to save both the fourth seat weak two and the opener's rebid of the major one bid for better hands without alienating too many partners stuck in bad contracts after opening a marginal opener 9 or 10 points is that it is relatively rare that none of the four hands has the strength of a normal opener. In fact the relative frequency of weak passing hands is so high that the expected value of the fourth hand is 15 hcp, and the 15-17 range NT is higher frequency than 12-14. So there must be another explanation as to why I can't keep partners. I think it is because I overanalyze the game and have no sense of humor. Asperger's syndrome, perhaps. My ex-partners think I am a Life Platzer. (Mr. Carmichael, Sr., father of great bridge pro Tom Carmichael, informed me that his children refer to him as "Life Platzer" in their e-mails.