Walddk

I have a 10 count after opener's disappointing 3♦, so 4♥ for me as quickly as possible. If he can't make a move over 4♥, we are unlikely to have a slam on. 4♥ gives him the message that 3♦ didn't thrill me. As others have said too, I can't bid a natural 3NT. That would be "serious" and denying a spade control. This is wrong on both accounts. I don't think it's a great loss not to have the natural 3NT available in this situation. Very rarely do you want to play in 3NT when you have a 5-4 (even 6-4) major fit. Roland

As you wish, I don't recommend it. Don't distort the lengths of your suits is my philosophy, and I can't remember when I last made an exception to that rule. Roland

I consider this type of agreement to be very problematic. Once your bidding systems includes a checkback sequences that says "partner forgot agreement" you've changed your basic agreement. The actual meaning of your 3NT response is "Slammy with both minors or Balanced, wants to signoff in Notrump" Disclosing anything else to your opponents strikes me as highly unethical. Given that this 3NT treatment is perfect legal, I really don't understand why you don't disclose this information to your opponents. (This is a game based on the premise Full Disclosure, right?) Sure, it might make you look a bit silly, but the solution to this is to avoid methods that your partnership is incapable of remembering. There is a good thread on rec.games.bridge that discusses this topic in depth http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.b...c3ddcd36f78d680 There is absolutely nothing unethical about this. 3NT is slammy with both minors and must be alerted. If 4mi is followed by 4NT, however, it's a sign off, and this is obviously also alertable. Responder forgot the system, and he has a legitimate way of revealing it. It is a partnership agreement, not a partnership understanding as such. It is indeed full disclosure because it was specifically outlined on our CC. Therefore, the opponents had all the info they are entitled to. And finally, congratulations to you if you never forgot any part of your system. If that is the case, you are probably the only player in the world who did not. If you did, I think it's best if .... "you avoid methods that your partnership is incapable of remembering". Roland

I used to play 2NT - 3NT as slammy with both minors. Over 4♣/♦, 4NT was: "Sorry partner, I forgot I couldn't bid a natural 3NT. Hope 4NT makes". Perfectly legitimate agreement, by the way. Roland

"The two panelist bidding 4♦ but willing to stay out of slam were Roland and MikeH". That's not quite right. I would drive to slam as I said: "4♦. Let me get a major cue bid. We can't stop below 6C". Roland

911 <_<

Depends on your agreements. If the double shows both unbid suits, 2♦ doesn't show extras; it's merely support of responder's diamonds. If, on the other hand, as most experts play it, double only shows spades, 2♦ should be a reverse, because responder hasn't promised diamonds. I am a subscriber to the latter, but it's all a matter of what the double promises. Roland

que??? You don't want me to take that off my cc again, do you? "4♣ is always Gerber when mikeh says it is", I wrote. Please confirm that you were *not* joking! Roland

Then I would bid 6♥ with a shrug. Punting is probably best, and if it's not, I'll apologise afterwards when we go down with 7♣ or 7♦ rigid. Roland

I can't play bridge without agreements. Can you? Guessing is not my kind of game. "Guessing" actually exists (invented in Denmark). It's a fun game, but it has nothing to do with bridge. Roland

You have, I have not. 4NT is not ace asking as I play it. You never have a hand where your only problem is how many key cards partner has. Use 4NT for something better, like two possibly three places to play. Roland You have it I don't have it.... This is not the purpose of the polls or is it? I mean we are supossed to be playing BBO-advanced as if we had agreed with pd to play that and then we have to solve the bidding situations posted. When BBO-advanced doesn't cover the meaning of a bid we are supossed to use judgement and logic to bid. So comments like "4nt is this or 4s shows that" are completely meaningless I'm not interested at all in what 4NT or 4♠ is when you play with your pd, I'm interested in what you would bid at the table with the posted conditions. The idea of the polls is to show how experts use judgement to determine the best bid available not as an interview about what each of us play with our pds. Note: This is not 100% for you Roland I assume you are saying you expect 4NT to be 3 places to play in this situation which is reasonable but many posters are showing a tendency of saying things like "with my pd I play that xx means yy" and I don't know the rest but I'm really not interested in such responses. Luis I agree with all you are saying, Luis, but the problem is that the continuation with a hand like this is a matter of partnership agreement, not about judgement. What is 4♠, 4NT, 5NT, whatever? BBO Advanced doesn't tell you, so it's all a question about what you agreed on. With this said, I think it's perfectly legitimate to state what you think is the best method for you and your partner. 4NT is not ace asking unless it's 100% obvious that trump is set. It's not in this case. Roland

You have, I have not. 4NT is not ace asking as I play it. You never have a hand where your only problem is how many key cards partner has. Use 4NT for something better, like two possibly three places to play. Roland

4♠ is the only way you can set clubs in my methods, and the hand is not suited for that although clubs could well be the final destination. Therefore, I went for something else in order to keep all options open. No one has suggested that bid yet, so let's wait a little. Roland

Give me a buzz if you need a partner some day :P Roland

I stronly disagree with both of these comments. The approach of always redoubling with 10+ pts is very old fashioned and in my opinion with good reason. It is much better to bid spades when you have decent 4+ spades. It is very likely that partner has 5 spades, so the lack in redouble says nothing about partner's strength. Given that 1S is unlimited, partner cannot cuebid 3C with a good but less than gameforcing raise, it shows a gameforcing hand. Therefore the 3D bid shows roughly invitational values (say 9-11 pts). This is perhaps just a question of partnership style and understanding, and I hope that the panel will comment on these issues. I agree with Hannie. If you think the opponents have a safe haven, it is (at best) waste of time to redouble. Just ignore the double and bid as you would have without the interference. Roland

That's so .... what?? Is that some kind of American cowboy slang? Roland

Why would you want to know when you don't want to be in 5♥? Roland

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=shqj1087432dakq73c&s=sakq873hd6cakq542]133|200|Scoring: Rubber[/hv] Blofeld and banlessard guessed it. Partner opened 5♥!! The bid you don't want to hear, because your 1 loser hand is now absolutely useless as dummy (provided that they lead a red suit). The interesting aspect is if North would interpret 5♠ as a wish to play? He should, shouldn't he? He knows that we know exactly what he has. Anyway, cute hand from real life! Roland

Thanks for the useful info. What else do you not remember? :P Roland

You are not alone Phil. This is what it says in our system notes: 2NT = 20-21 HCP Stayman, Jacoby, Texas, Smolen, Gerber 3♠-->3N for minor suit hands I don't think this is an adequate description when the continuation after 3NT is not outlined. It doesn't even stipulate if opener is allowed to break the transfer. Consequently, I suggest 100 points for any bid thereafter. Roland

No, and is it worth the effort? How often will a situation like this come up? To stay in your world of galaxies: once in a blue moon! Roland

Really? So he has lost his senses if he bids 5♦ with: ♠ x ♥ Ax ♦ KQJ109xxx ♣ KQ or something similar? Roland

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakq873hd6cakq542]133|100|Scoring: Rubber[/hv] Rubber bridge, high stake. I can see the smile on your lips already. Partner is dealer. What is the bid you would least like to hear? ;) Roland

No, he doesn't have a singleton spade, more likely three small. That's fine, because (in my dreams at least) this is his minimum: ♠ xxx ♥ AKxxx ♦ KQx ♣ xx He hates his spades opposite my limit+, so he signs off in 3♥ opposite a limit raise. If he gets 4♣ from you, he will obviously drop dead in a flash. If 3♠ is the bid he sees, he will surely co-operate. Roland

That doesn't look right to me. By cue bidding 4♣ you deny a spade control, so how do you want partner to figure out that you have one nevertheless? If he has ♦K and no spade control, he will sign off in 4♥, because 4♦ would confirm a spade control now that you denied one when you bypassed 3♠. Roland