raist

i am in favour of it not promising a D control but just for the sake of discussion, if 4D does not necessarily promise D control would you not face problems in finding out the existence of a D control later when you wish to explore for slam? is this solved by cuebidding at the 5 level?

when the bidding goes 1♥-(3♦) what do you guys play 4♦ as? 1. ♥ support with a definite ♦ control 2. ♥ support may or may not have ♦control? 3. any other possible meaning? (i doubt it) now my question for those who play it as definitely promising a D control would be what do you bid with this hand Ax KTxx Qxx AQTx you are too strong to bid 4H directly, but neither do you have a D control

not to harp on this issue but both Fred and Uday have mentioned that the firewall issue will be fixed "soon" (specific time frames such as "next week" were given) i would really like to know when the fix is really coming i mean, it's ok if you say it's going to take a month, but then please do deliver it in a month!

1) should inverted minors be on for a passed hand? (NO COMPETITION) i can't find much literature about this. i searched the CCs of HH and LV, and realised that one plays on and one plays off. so it seems there may not be much of a difference, just a matter of preference? 2) is it better for fourth suit bid at the 2 level to be INV+ instead of GF? are there any drawbacks or complications that may arise? in particular, i refer to this hand: ♠KJTxx ♥xx ♦KTxx ♣Kxx partner opens 1♥ and bidding goes(no interference): 1♥-1♠-2♣ now your bid. it seems that all calls are not too satisfactory 2♥/♠ are slight underbids, 2NT is not perfect so you may want to bid 2♦ as INV+, instead of GF again, are there any possible drawbacks to this approach?

yes. i meant it as pre emptive although it does not keep the opps out of 4S if they so choose to bid it, it forces them into a "last guess" position. they can't investigate 4S anymore and hopefully they guess wrongly and my partner is there to make life difficult for them with his stack of spades

[hv=d=n&v=b&s=skjth8dkt42ct8652]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] bidding goes: 1♦-(1♠)-2♦-(2♠) 4♦-(pass)

ok i need to come clean. i was the one bid_em_up helped to post this (i was on my alternate account) my bid at the table was 4D, which on hindsight, is bad, especially on that diamond SQ i bid it with for two reasons: 1. it is (slightly) pre emptive (although won't stop them from bidding 4S, but would force them into a guess, and partner may have some spades that could cause them trouble) 2. i thought game to be unlikely, which is why i did not bid 3C i guess there needs to be some discussion as to what 4D would be at these colours but i bid it as absolutely not an invitation, with invitation, i would bid 3C/H/S and yes, following normal principles, a raise of partner's suit in competition is not strength showing. so 2D/3D would all be weak-medium raises, with 3D being more shapely and weakish still

Thanks for mentioning this and sorry we haven't dealt with it. We are trying to work out something now. I will make another post if/when we are successful. It may not happen for another week or so. Fred Gitelman Bridge Base Inc. www.bridgebase.com Just a suggestion: BBO TV and vugraph mobile works through the firewall so perhaps one way is to make web bbo use the same ports/protocols

I hope that this new version will either: 1)inherit the browser's proxy settings instead of making a direct connection all the time OR 2) use port 80 or 443 instead of port 3336 like it currently does one of the big things about web bbo was that it would bypass firewalls but it's not doing so. users who are behind corporate or university firewalls which only open ports 80 and 443 are still unable to use web bbo