ahydra

It seems that a recent update to vugraph display now has the team directions displaying twice, like "(EW) (EW) Wolfson" - see here: https://imgur.com/a/DaVE5Eq At first I thought the BBO operators for the Vanderbilt had put the extra (EW) there in the team name, but the problem reproduces exactly the same on both tables, so it must be an issue with the BBO software. ahydra

Is the BBO schedule for the World Championships off by an hour? It says it starts at 10pm NZDT, but it's actually starting at 9pm (23 minutes from now). Figure it may be due to DST changes occurring in various countries round about this time of year. Not sure if it shows correctly in other countries? ahydra

Hah, this reminds me of a time the TD was called to adjust for damage after my partner had failed to alert one of my bids. The opps claimed they would make a very lucrative, but not at all obvious, penalty double and the TD bought it. We appealed and got the double taken off. If it's not an obvious action the TD really needs to poll it. One problem here with the law about correcting MI at the end of the auction (for the declaring side) is the fact this is played online. Suppose the player making the unalerted transfer was N. N isn't aware the transfer requires an alert; S may be, but he isn't aware his partner hasn't alerted it! The same thing happens when there is a forgotten convention. So in these cases, questions need to be asked after the dummy comes down, and the TD called if necessary. It seems like the first of these steps was done but not the more important second step. One could argue the point about players protecting themselves in this situation since 1NT-2D unalerted; 2H is 99% of the time an unalerted transfer, but I'm happy to give the NOS the benefit of the doubt on that one. However I don't buy the argument they'd have bid 2S, so unless a poll can convince me otherwise that the auction would be different, I'm not going to change the score here. The most important aspect here is to ensure the players are educated both in following the Alert regulations (including "if even a tiny bit in doubt, alert it", since this is online play), and in calling the TD in a timely manner, namely when dummy was displayed. ahydra

I must admit, I'd pass this in 1st or 2nd seat. I prefer my pre-empts to be bit more tightly defined, namely at most 1 outside defensive trick. This hand also has a lot of potential to play in hearts. In 3rd seat 4C or 5C depending on vulnerability and the weather. ahydra

Are these actual squeezes? In both cases the defender is not really squeezed, but they are forced to reveal the position so declarer can't get it wrong. 1) [hv=pc=n&s=shda75ckj&w=shdq96cq9&n=s2hqdkj2c&e=s54h4d83c]399|300[/hv] North is declarer in notrump, and on lead. We assume that the count of each suit is known but not who has the DQ. North leads his heart throwing a diamond from dummy, and West must either set up the CJ or reveal the position of the DQ (after DA, CK, Dx led). In this case West is legitimately squeezed, but if the D8 and DQ are swapped, the position still works. 2) This hand from today was probably the most insane hand I have ever held: [hv=pc=n&s=sakqj8hdakq8765ct&w=shkq543dt93ck9652&n=s74hjt98dj42caq43&e=st96532ha762dcj87&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=ppp2c(GF)p2n(8%2B%20no%20good%205%2B%20suit)p4c(gerber)p4h(1%20ace)p6dppp&p=hkh8h2d5d6d3djs2d4h6dad9dkdtd2c7sac2s4s3skc5s7s5sqc6h9s6sjh3c3s9dqh4c4h7d8h5htc8]399|300[/hv] Not having a 4NT specific ace ask opening available, nor Exclusion, I had to improvise a bit and decided over 2NT that ace asking wasn't the worst idea; if partner had two I could bid 7NT with confidence, and with one I just had to settle for 6D and hope it was the HA (which was more likely). The play was a rollercoaster of emotions - first I was annoyed to have missed the grand when partner showed up with the correct ace, but then it was quite a surprise when the spades broke 6-0... and in the end, if one assumes from the lead that East has the HA, there was this weird "information double squeeze" which I found really cool (click through to see the 3-card ending). I lead the last diamond and if West throws the HQ then East must throw a club, but then it's known that West has both remaining clubs so the finesse is a lock. Else, West keeps the heart guard and East throws the HA, but now the remaining clubs are known to be 1-1, and the king will fall no matter who has it. ahydra

You have an invitational hand, quite a nice one, but its defence is limited. It depends on what X means, but there is always a risk partner will leave it in, and you will struggle to beat the contract as you have only 1 defensive trick. As others have said, even if you get it one down, that's not great when you can make 110 or more in hearts. As such, I think you have to bid 3H, rather than double. Should North take the double out? It depends on what it is defined as. If it is not strictly penalty, then there is maybe an argument for taking it out with that wonderful KJx support for hearts, as partner being a passed hand means they are unlikely to provide 3 more defensive tricks. ahydra

Law 71B would suggest that the concession can be cancelled in this case. But the correction period has expired, so the TD is within their rights to refuse to change the score. IMHO, this aspect of the claim interface on BBO ought to be changed, so that it is a uniform interface regardless of who is declarer and who is currently to play. I doubt that RR is the only player who has been caught out by this. ahydra

Could this be adjudged under L68D(b)(ii)? L68D(b)(ii) explicitly states that L16 doesn't apply, so ChCh can use without penalty the UI that it was not the robot who rejected the claim, and was always entitled to know of and use information about the robots' tendencies in a claim situation (L16A2). Now it's true that neither SB nor the robot explicitly asked declarer to play it out, as in the wording of 68D(b), but nobody called the TD either, so perhaps this request could be deemed to be made and agreed to implicitly? In particular, if SB sought a ruling later, with his knowledge of the Laws and skill at the game, I would ask him why he didn't call at the time of the claim. ahydra

Standard sequence for this is 2C then 3S, invitational. (2D then 3S would be technically incorrect, but entirely understandable given the quality of the diamonds compared to the clubs.) If playing 2/1 it's 1N then 3S. This is the only hand pattern where a bid of 2x doesn't promise 4, as the 2H response guarantees a 5-card suit. It is entirely safe, as no matter how many clubs partner may bid, you can correct to spades. ahydra

Declarer played for an elimination: ruffed the SK lead, club to K and A, spade returned and ruffed, HA, club, spade ruff, club, and a heart to North's Q. North then had to lead away from Ax of diamonds or concede a ruff-sluff. He played the DA which makes it rather too easy, but declarer can't really go wrong as the cards lie - he can duck a small diamond return to dummy and then play another and the A pops up. ahydra

[hv=pc=n&s=sakqj5hkdjt83c742&w=st93h853dk972ckq6&n=s87642hq4da5cat98&e=shajt9762dq64cj53&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=p4hppp]399|300[/hv] IMPs, nobody vul. Expert opps. At our table they opened 4H, got to play it, and it's cold. At the other table: (p)-3H-(3S)-p; (4H good raise)-p-(4S)-all p, and a heart was led, so that was a double game swing. Anyone to blame or is it just luck to do with the style of pre-empt? All's well that's ends well, as we beat this team of internationals by a single IMP ;) ahydra

Close - there's a slightly better line though. ahydra

Fun hand from a team match I just played. Puzzle for I/A - experts please use spoiler tags. [hv=pc=n&s=saj96hakj52da93c6&n=sqt5ht987dq64ct73&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1h2c2hp4hppp]266|200[/hv] IMPs, both vul. West leads CK, East showing upside-down count with the 9, then switches to the DJ (standard leads from sequences). How do you plan to make the hand? ahydra

Tough one. If I open 1H, I'm well-placed unless I hear 2D, in which case I have to rebid my hearts (but that's fairly typical, would be the same even if I was 5-5). The risk is then that partner leaves me in 2H when we make four, but he'll only do that with an absolute minimum 2D response, and given my lack of aces and the fact partner's diamond honours are likely to be useless, this isn't much of a risk. If I open 1C then I am nowhere near good enough to reverse into 2H over a 1S response - although the clubs are more than good enough to rebid, I haven't shown that I have even one heart, let alone five! If partner responds 1D, I could get the shape across nicely after something like 1C-1D; 1H-something; 2H. Mainly we should be looking to get to 4H. Particularly if playing Walsh, the risk of it going 1C-1S and it becoming too hard to find 4H means that - I think - opening 1H offers the best chance of that. It certainly allows partner to get into the right mindset much easier if he holds three hearts. ahydra

Indeed, something's gone a bit wrong. Yesterday when I was trying to retrieve the team-match results, I was at least able to see the hands I'd played in a tournament the day before. Today, even those results are gone (yes, I did change the search date :-) ). ahydra