Walddk

Concentrate on what play opposite KQJx Kx Kxxx KJx I even gave him a 16 count, and there is no slam on. With some luck you will make 11 tricks, but it takes at least one revoke to make 12. I don't see any need to punt. In my bidding box there are a few cards (17 actually) between 2♠ and 6♦. Roland

Here is a link to a few pictures from the World Championships at Estoril: http://www.q-bid.de/Bilder/Estoril/Internationales/index.htm I recognize a bored (tired?) Fred Gitelman, among others. Thanks to Nikolaus Bausback from Germany. Roland

I disagree. It's not fair to ask unpaid volunteer commentators to prepare if they don't have a clue as to which pairs will appear in the final. And most importantly, when they can't find a relevant convention card anywhere. If we know in advance that X-Y will play against K-L, and we get a link to convention cards, then I agree. Then assigned commentators should have a look and familiarise themselves with the systems. Roland

As expected, and quite reasonable, I get lots of questions about the Fall Nationals in Denver, Colorado (under way now). When, what, and so on. Blue Ribbon Pairs? Reisinger BAM Teams, etc.? To be honest with you, we simply don't know. We get very little info from the ACBL, but as far as I understand, the intention at this point is to just broadcast from the last two sessions of the Reisinger. Disappointed? Well, you are entitled to be, but remember not to blame it on BBO. We let the organisers use our software for free, but we do not decide what they show us. We will update our vugraph schedule page as soon as we get exact dates and session starting times. Roland

What makes you think that the organisers tell us that in advance? Sadly, they don't, and rest assured that we encourage them to do just that in our standard vugraph guidelines. Roland

Or switch everything while you're at it; like one Australian pair we had on vugraph yesterday (Richman-Nagy). 1♣ 15+, 1♦ 11-14 with 4+ hearts, 1♥ 11-14 with 4+ spades and 1♠ 11-14 with 4+ diamonds. Not sure how much our spectators grasped, but as far as I'm concerned it's not very meaningful and rather boring to be a commentator, especially when you don't have the convention cards at hand. Roland

V stands for Victory, so if you are dealt the V of hearts, you will make any contract. ♥V beats any card opps may throw at you, and you are allowed to use it several times. Roland

If you do, I will call the law and you will be sentenced to 3 years on stale bread and luke warm water. You will get the worst possible result for your side, so maybe 4½ years instead of 3. Roland

Hmmmm You'd better have a word with your team-mates then. 6NT is less than 50% on a spade lead! You see how lucky you were? Roland

You know things aren't going well when... Well, on the contrary I would say. Things are going very well indeed when you see that the opponents can take 14 tricks in clubs, diamonds and NT, and still end up with 12. What a lucky man you are :) Roland

OK, here is my list of topics if you want to teach intermediates: 1. Basic bidding. 2. Basic declarer play. 3. Basic defence. After years of practice we can move on to 4. Advanced bidding. 5. Advanced declarer play. 6. Advanced defence. I know, it's boring, but no one gets anything for nothing. It's damn hard work, and one has to go through all that boring stuff in order to learn the game. Then, and only then, will it be real fun. Roland

If this is how the management of that partcular private club treats certain members, then it seems best that you are no longer there. If it's the club I think it is, I can tell you that I was thrown out years ago. It hasn't given me any sleepless nights. Jilly, I am sure you can get your lessons elsewhere. Roland

Good points Mike, and you are very close to what he actually had: ♠ xx ♥ Kxx ♦ KQxxx ♣ AJ10 A reasonable grand slam when played by opener (no annoying club through). Spades 3-3 or 4-2 with doubleton queen, or the club finesse. However, I don't think it's easy to bid when opener doesn't have the ♠Q. Roland

"Replying to Topic for an intermidiate level course" is the name of the game. Forget about squeezes. I have said this a dozen times before, and I haven't changed my mind. I repeat: most intermediates do not master even the simplest of card play, so why on earth would one waste their time with squeezes? Intermediate players may not like to hear this, but that's how it is. And as we all know: nothing hurts like the truth. Roland

3♣ as a sign off, and as I said earlier 3♥ as mildly invitational with 6-4 after 1mi - 1♠ ; 1NT. In all other situations I go through 2♣ with invitational hands, 2♦ with GF ditto. Since opener is limited, I think it's more important to explore his hand regarding pattern and strength when I am strong enough to force to (at least) game. My hand is unlimited, so it seems prudent that I am the captain. Roland

Reading books is good, no doubt about it, but there is no substitute for practice, practice and more practice at the table. You don't improve your bidding, dummy play and defence, let alone win tournaments, in your study or in the library. Roland

I don't by this. 1♦ (3♠) comes up so rarely that it is not worth playing Switch if partner forgets it just once. He may never get another chance to get it right. Next time it does, in perhaps 6 months, 11 days and 4 hours, he is likely to forget again. Bye bye to the gadget will be my conclusion. Roland

Never heard of this Roland, sorry ! A lot of French play the 2NT response to Stayman as both majors so they open 1NT with both majors :rolleyes: Alain Well, during a recent vugraph broadcast a commentator and several spectators claimed that Alain Levy among other French stars recommend that you don't open 1NT with 4-4 in the majors. Then the commentators had a lengthy discussion about the rebid problems if you don't open 1NT. Roland

I think it's unsound to base one's action based on the possibility that partner has forgotten the system. I'll bid 4♠, cue bid agreeing clubs, no heart cue bid. 5♥ from partner next won't change my mind. He has told me that he has clubs, and I believe him. If it turns out that he hasn't, it's about time that we dump that agreement. Roland

In theory, 2♥ could be 4 cards with 3433 (you can always correct to spades later if opener supports hearts), but I prefer to respond 2♣ with that pattern. Then 2♥ will always be 5+ over 1♠. Roland

I can only speak for myself: 6-4 in the majors, mildly invitational. 5-5 invitational would go through 2♣, then 3♥. ALL game forcing hands go through 2♦ in order to determine opener's pattern. But back to the issue here. How do *you* proceed with the actual hand after opener's 1NT? Are you are able to set diamonds earlier and give up on opener's shape? Do you care if he has three spades or not? What is 3♦ in your methods? Roland

I don't see anything weird here. Most expert pairs play 2-way check back Stayman. Consequently, only 2♦ is GF after a 1NT rebid (2♣ would be the beginning of an invitational sequence). You may not play it, but it's quite normal in expert circles, and that's where I have posted this. It's not my intention to impose anything on you or anyone else for that matter. If you have a better way to explore after the 1NT rebid, go ahead and use it. Roland

Not easy at all. We have a grand opposite Qx, Kxx, KQxxx, Axx and no slam facing Qx, KQx, KQJxx, J10x The question is if we can find out if we must set trumps (4♦) first. Some play that 4♦ sets trumps and asks for key cards at the same time (kickback), but that won't solve the problem regarding a possible missing club control. Roland

That's no good. 4♣ would set the suit. What else can you do if you are 5-5 in the blacks? 4♦ will set diamonds, and 4NT will be key card ask for diamonds if you like. Roland

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakj43ha2da1094cq3]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 15-17 NT. You are South, and the bidding goes: 1♦ - 1♠ 1N - 2♦*) 3♦+) *) Artificial GF relay. +) 2-3-5-3 and maximum. You want to set diamonds and find out if there is a club control or not **). 3♥ is not a cue bid for diamonds; it sets hearts (responder is 6-5 or 5-5 in the majors). What is your next bid, and what does it mean? **) It is possible to give opener a maximum with no ♣A or K. Roland