bd71

5♣/5♦/5♥ show a quant accept with 0/1/2 aces as a way to get out at 5N in case we somehow are off two. 5♠ is quant accept but would normally inquire about playing a minor suit slam. We've only discussed this after "pure" NT auctions (1N-4N, 2N-4N, etc.) so not sure this would apply here. Maybe it should as a way to bring a diamond slam back into the picture. I didn't include these as poll options because I thought they would be non-standard. But per our agreements the quant accept shoudl show aces at the 5-level rather than bid 6N directly as suggested in the poll.

[hv=pc=n&e=s8haq76432daj87cq&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=pp1d]133|200[/hv] Macthpoints. Question in poll...

[hv=pc=n&w=sqt7hkt754d65cj32&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=p1hd2hppdp]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints Question in poll...

[hv=pc=n&e=s92hkj86dkj73caj5&d=s&v=b&b=7&a]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Both vul. South deals. Two questions in poll...

Is there a known way to fix the mismatch of commentary to boards being shown in the Vugraph archives? Commentary I am reading while ostabsibly at the Helgemo-Helness table in set 1 of the finals is talking about Jenny Wolpert.

[hv=pc=n&s=sat9ht8632d5ca853&n=skj542hkdkqj7632c&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p1c1dp1hp1spp2c3sp4sppp]266|200[/hv] Teams. Club lead. What are your thoughts about the safest way to play the hand to protect against bad breaks in the two key suits?

[hv=pc=n&s=sathkq5dkj62caq62&n=s3h7daq53cjt98743&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=pp1c2s3c3s4sd5cppp]266|200[/hv] Teams. Bad opponents. Clubs were 1-1, king offside.

To those bidding 3D, do you not think you could easily be pre-empting your side out of 4H? Or do you just think that risk is outweighed by other things that can go well?

[hv=pc=n&e=s4hkjtdkt98432c73&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=p]133|200[/hv] Teams. Your call please, and your level of certainty in your answer.

I have almost zero experience in knockouts NOT having 2^x teams. One of the mini-Spingolds starting tomorrow will go from 30 to 16. Questions: 1. I assume this will likely be 12 head-to-heads and two "2 of 3 qualify" round robins. Does this sound right? Is it automatic, or is there director discretion? 2. Assuming #1 is right, is there a standard way to set it up with seeds? Will seeds 1/2 get into the round robins, and if so will they play the 4 teams seeded 27-30? Or maybe the 1/2 seeds face the teams seeded 15-18? Or is this all non-standardized and up to director discretion? Edit: In you you're wondering, the conditions of contest are no help at all: "The DiC will create a bracket to the best playing advantage of the field."

[hv=pc=n&n=saq97532h75d4ck84]133|100[/hv] What is your preference and why? Edit: we are NV vs. Vul. Further edit: first seat.

This question came up recently with a partner...if our standard cue-bidding approach is 1st/2nd round controls, should cues after 2C-2D-3M show the ace or king? Or is there some good reason to shift to an ace-only approach here?

[hv=pc=n&s=skq7h432dt9765c63&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p1hd2h]133|200[/hv] IMPs. Your call? To what extent does the quality of your ♦ suit impact your thinking?

[hv=pc=n&n=sakt85hqd974cat42&d=s&v=e&b=3&a=p4h]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Your call and reasoning?

3♣ is 4+ ♣ invitational strength, likely denies diamond stopper unless a very shapely hand 4♥ is 2 ♥, ostensibly placing contract

[hv=pc=n&s=sj52hak7632dcaq53&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1hp1sp2cp3cp3hp4hp]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Mainstream 2/1. Do you move over 4H?

[hv=pc=n&s=sqjt983h854dqt6c3&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=1n(14-16)p2c]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Opponents are good.

What are the recommended parameters for when this treatment is on? Is it just after 1y-(2x)? Or is 1x-(1y) also a good use? How about when we have overcalled...(1x)-1y-(p)-2N? Obviously, I can try to develop some rules from scratch, but would appreciate advice from those with experience playing it.

It's not specified, but in these methods (and I thought standard methods), 3♣ is a limit raise. 3♠ would be 4+ spades pre-emptive.

[hv=pc=n&s=sq6haj643d8ckqt43&d=w&v=e&b=16&a=p1n(Good%2014-17)p2d(transfer)p2hp3c(2nd%20suit)p3h(Better%20than%20min%2C%20agrees%20hearts)p]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Your options are basically cue-bidding (1st/2nd round controls) or 4♥. How likely do you think slam is? What's your choice?

[hv=pc=n&s=sq982hj654dajcat8&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1dp1hp1sp]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Partner will open most 11s, and 10s that roughly fit a "Rule of 19" or so. Better minor. 1♠ guarantees an unbalanced hand. Regardless of how you would do it systemically, do you feel your hand is worth a GF or merely an invite?

[hv=pc=n&s=sk765h3dakq9ckt62&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1dp1sp]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Mainstream 2/1 agreements. Listed plenty of options in the poll, but I presume the choice will be between 3♠ and 4♥. If you choose 3♠, would changing one black king to an ace bump you up to 4♥, or does it require even more?

2/1 context, with mainstream conventions. A partner and I had a discussion/disagreement about this yesterday, stemming from a talk about what range of hands is feasible for a 1N forcing response to 1♠. After a 1♠-1N start to an auction, we were asked at the table what the possible range for the forcing 1N response was. The response given was "unlimited", while the 1N bidder thought it was a max of 12 or so. The disagreement comes down to how you would handle a hand like the following: [hv=pc=n&s=skj4hajt2dkq6ca92&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=1sp]133|200[/hv] The hand lacks some element required for other obvious alternatives: 1. No 4th ♣/♦ to bid 2m. 2. No 4th ♠ to bid J2N. 3. No 5th ♥ to bid 2♥. 4. Too strong to bid 3N, which by agreement is this shape with 13-15 and offers choice of games. Only other option I can imagine is a 3-card game-forcing jump-shift, which I'm guessing some may choose over 1N. Questions: 1. What would you bid in the shown hand? 2. Separate from this hand, what explanation would you give to a question about the range of a forcing 1N over 1♠?

[hv=pc=n&s=sj853h87d6cajt732&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=ppp1s2h]133|200[/hv] IMPs. 2/1. 3♥ is limit raise w/ 3+ trump. What's your call?

[hv=pc=n&s=s85hk5djt83cak982&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp]133|200[/hv] IMPs. Partnership agreement is for "light" pre-empts non-vul. 2/1 context: 2C is strong/forcing, 2D is weak/pre-emptive. Partner is likely NOT opening 11s unless they are Rule of 20. If it matters, you are playing a bad team in a 7-board segment of a Swiss. What is your call?