Walddk

And oxymoron is a word not all Canadians would understand I bet. Roland

Will you be starring in a movie any time soon? :P "Bridge(t) is my Passion" perhaps? Anyway, who cares about the title as long as you can have Renée Zellweger as your partner, at and away from the table? :P Roland

He is only Canadian when they win, so most of the time he is not. Roland

1NT doesn't promise clubs the way I play it. It denies majors, yes, but not diamonds. Roland

If you asked that question in the lobby news, the answer would be an overwhelming "yes". We only have a tiny minority of the members in the Forums, so what you get here would not be a fair estimate. Not too much work, you said. Then why not try it and tell people about it in the lobby news. Roland

2NT. It's an 18 count to me, so all I can do is invite. Roland

Are you sure? Axx xxx Axx xxxx It's against the odds to make a move with that hand over 1NT (when can a 1NT opener produce 7 tricks?), and yet you have a 68% chance of making 3NT. Roland

It all depends on your agreement. Is double penalty or not, or is it a game try in hearts? No matter what, as previously said, you don't have a double with that hand. You have no penalty of 3♣ and you have no game try opposite a single raise. This has become a likely 12 count on the auction. Roland

7♥. We have a maximum of 12 tricks in NT unless partner has 6 hearts (unlikely) or 5 hearts and ♣J (possible). Then there is a black squeeze against West. However, 7NT would be too much of a gamble, so I will settle for the heart grand. It may not even be lay down. By the way, I don't agree that your partner's 2♥ shows 0-7 or the like. Up to 11(12) rather after a double in the balancing seat. Partner must remember to deduct the ace (some say king) you "stole" when you re-opened. Most people play a balancing double as just 8+ hcp. Roland

Your partner, he bid them first. The only thing that has happened is that you accepted 1♥ as a legal bid. You can't change the auction to pass 1♥ 1♠, so your partner's 1♠ will remain there, and he will be declarer in a spade contract. Roland

Technical issues are not my desk (we have Fred and Uday as our experts), but I can understand the language problems many of our members have. Some may think that English is universal, but we know that it's not, and as often as it's practically possible we will offer commentary in multiple languages. Over the past 3 years we have had commentary in English, French, Spanish, Polish, Italian, Russian, Turkish, Japanese, Chinese, "Indonesian", "Korean" and "Scandinavian". We believe that this is greatly appreciated by our members and we will continue to render this service as often as possible. We won't have to look far. We will be offering "Scandinavian" commentary for our broadcast from Norway over the weekend. Roland

No, I wouldn't downgrade it to 15-17. How often do you have 6 certain tricks when you open 1NT? Never. And furthermore, how often do you have 6 certain tricks when you open 1x and rebid 2NT over 1y? Almost never. It's 18 to me, close between 18 and a good 18. I will downgrade it to 18 for two reasons. 1. Empty in 2 suits. 2. 3334. I have nothing to be ashamed of if the auction goes 1♣ - 1♠ 2NT Roland

I would downgrade it to ZERO hcp. Where is the hand? Roland

You have been damaged by the missing alert. You did not have the option of passing when 2♦ wasn't alerted. Everyone would re-open with either double or 3♣ with that hand given that 2♦ was NF. Should you have protected yourself by asking is the question. Delicate matter, but I think no. It would not come as a big surprise that 2♦ was NF on this auction, so I would assume that it was when not alerted. Had you known that 2♦ showed 11+ and therefore a 1-round force, you would sometimes pass, but you did not get the chance here. Pass is not a logical alternative if 2♦ shows 6-9 opposite opener's 10-15. Roland

No, we do not announce the NT range. We display a convention card of course, and weak notrump is pretty common here. In my opinion there is no reason to ask about the range when you can look for yourself - unless you intend to wake your partner of course. That is UI for sure, and he is obviously not allowed to take advantage. Finally, Phil, thanks for pointing out that we are on the right side of the pond, and MikeH therefore on the wrong side :lol: Roland

Yes, as long as you behave. You may be the second largest country in the world, and we may be #137, but it won't help you. Danish dynamite will prevail! I will call the Queen in a minute and ask her to send yet another vessel to our beloved island, Hans Ø .... just in case you get ideas! Roland

I would not opposite a single raise, and especially not now that my opponents have told me that my ♣K is most likley not worth the 3 hcp I counted when I picked my hand up. Roland

MikeH is a wimp; no wonder we are not scared at all for being at war with Canada :P Roland

Pass seems pretty clear to me. ♣K is of dubious value on the auction. I don't think they have stolen anything from us if partner can't bid again. Roland

In a borderline case at IMPs I normally prefer to run the active risk (bid) rather than the passive one (pass). I am not proud of it, but I would bid 4♠. Double is not an alternative to me. I am not particularly thrilled with pass or 5♦ from partner. Pass may very well be the winning bid, but it's too wimpish to my liking. If you never go for 800 or 1100, you don't bid enough. If LHO had been an unpassed hand, I would tilt towards pass. Roland

4333 and just one 10. 1NT is enough for me. If partner can't move, we are unlikely to have missed anything big. Plusschreiben und gewinnen. You don't get a lot for 2NT down 1. Roland

In his excellent book on competitive bidding, Kaplan has a whole chapter on bidding vs weak and strong NT. He writes that, in balancing seat vs weak NT, if anything, he requires a hand even stronger than doubling in direct seat, because opps value are sitting OVER his. Perhaps this might be a little too much, yet, doubling with 10 hcp in 4th seat sounds crazy. Therefore, I think that passing is not only a logical alternative, but *the most* logical bid, regardless of the form of scoring, unless there was UI. Maybe you missed that South passed initially? He can hardly be stronger for his re-opning double. Roland

Roland, the reason I made the post is that you DO need someone telling you how to ask your question. At the moment, you are doing a pretty poor job of it. Consider the following definition of "logical alternative" taken from section 16.6 of the EBU's White Book. "A logicial alternative is a call or play which three or more in ten players of equal ability could be expected to make in the particular situation, if playing a similar system and style, but if the irregularity had not occured". The entire issue of logical alternative hinges on what action players would take in the absence of UI. 1. Its clear that from questions 3 and 4, that the first order of business is determining whether double is a logical alternative 2. Introducing extraneous informtion regarding UI does nothing to improve the accuracy of this process. Indeed, by providing this information you are biasing the results. Personally, I think that if you are going to ask for our help, you have an obligation not to waste our time. Your milage may vary... If you think you are wasting your time, I suggest that you take no further part in this thread. I put the questions the way I like to put my questions, without asking you for permission first. Believe me, if I needed your advice, you would be the first to know, but I don't. Others don't seem to have any objections to the way I put my questions. You are entitled to your opinion, but the remedy is so simple that it defies belief: stay away if you don't like what you see! Hope this is clear. Your last paragraph is outright offensive. Roland

Could be that I'm responder. In that case I'll bid 1NT at matchpoints and 2NT at IMPs. No need to strethch at MP. Just play the contract one trick better than the other declarers. Roland

I don't need you to tell me how to ask my questions. I don't interfere with your business, so I think it's fair to ask you not to interfere with mine. No one asked you to reply if you don't like the post. So go and yell elsewhere if you really must! Thanks. Roland