Walddk

PASS. Partner couldn't act over 1♠ although he is short, so he doesn't have as much as 6 hcp and 4+ hearts and not 4+ clubs. It's time to get out of this. 3♦ is what I get if I double, and I don't want to hear that. 1363 is his most likely shape. I am glad a weak 2 in diamonds wasn't on our cc. Roland

Yes, ArcLight, I am sure I have more experience with mixed cue bids (Italian school) than you, and there is no doubt in my mind what the best approach is. If you must have the ace for your first cue bid, how can responder know that it's safe to cue bid 4♦ with xxx AQxx Axxx xx after this auction: 1♥ - 3♥ = limit 4♣ =cue bid, denying ♠A. It's fine opposite x KJxxxx KQx AKx But it's so wrong when opener has xxx KJxxxx KQ AK Give opener the chance to show whether he has any kind of spade control. With the first hand he bids 3♠, with the second 4♣, indicating xx or worse in spades at the same time. This makes life so much easier. I agree completely with Richard. The Italian style is definitely better for investigating small slams, and they are obviously much more frequent than grands. Besides, you know when to sign off in game when both have xx or worse in a side suit. In my second example the 5-level is too high. The Italian way of cue bidding is standard for me, and let me add: it is for most top class players in North America too in 2005. Roland

Then you can't differentiate since you can't play transfer responses to 1♦. I did state that you can solve many of these problems, a little more than 50% of the times, e.g. when partner opens 1♣. Roland Yes you can. Some play that 1D 1H = S and 1D 1S = H. Fair enough, but that does not give you more room when responder shows hearts. It does after a 1♣ opening. Roland

Then you can't differentiate since you can't play transfer responses to 1♦. I did state that you can solve many of these problems, a little more than 50% of the times, e.g. when partner opens 1♣. Transfer responses to 1♣ are so much better because they give you more room to manoeuvre. Still more top class players worldwide agree, and we will no doubt see it happen more often in the future. Roland

Indeed or really(?) as you please. Remind me not to double 4♥ with AQxx void KJxxx KQJx or similar as I will lose a double game swing. Roland

Playing weak NT, you will solve many of these problems if you play transfer responses to 1♣. Then you can bid like this: 1♣ - 1♦ = hearts 1♥ At least 3-card support, forcing for 1 round. If 4-card support, unbalanced. 1♣ - 1♦ = hearts 2♥ 4-card support, 15-16(17), balanced. Jacob Duschek of Denmark made these points while commentating from Brazil the other day. All other commentators liked the idea. Roland

Allow me to draw your attention to the upcoming inaugural Bank Indonesia Governor's Cup in Jakarta (September 12-18). 20 top quality teams from all parts of the world will be competing for the honours and big prize money. Here are a couple of links for your convenience: http://online.bridgebase.com/vugraph/sched...?order_by=event http://www.gabsi.or.id/bi-gov-cup/ The times are very awkward for people in North America and Europe, but since when has that stopped us from watching high quality bridge when on offer? Let me add that we now also have a complete BBO time schedule for the Bermuda Bowl, Venice Cup & Senior Bowl in Portugal in October/November. The first link above will take you there. http://www.worldbridge1.org/tourn/Estoril.05/Estoril.htm will take you to the official championship site. For much more info, please go to http://www.ecatsbridge.com/Events/wbf/2005...ril/default.asp Roland

I agree Justin, but I need to point out that it's take-out since many do not play take-out doubles this high. Some play it through 2♠, others through 3♠, and for them double of 4♥ would be for business. Roland

The answer to that question is very simple: Because they were formidable bridge players! And although you think that their system was rotten, it was apparently good enough to dominate the world of bridge. As we have pointed out so many times before, the system is only a part of the whole. However, Blue Club was indeed adequate. You have enough evidence. Roland

I am not so sure about that Justin. If he does, when will responder know whether to sign off in 3♣ or bid 3NT holding Qxx J xxx Axxxxx 3NT is fine opposite a great fit, not opposite Qx. Roland

I can't see anything wrong with letting a jump to the 3-level show two top honours to six, invitational to 3NT if opener has a fit. As an example, say you have this hand: xxx xx xx AKxxxx opposite AKx Kxx Axxxx Qx Now you will get to a 68% game (3NT) if your methods allow you to respond 3♣. If, on the other hand, you have the agreement that 2♠ is a transfer to clubs (that's how I and many others play nowadays), opener will not super-accept even if he could according to your agreement, and 3♣ is where you are going to play. Have a punt at 3NT with responder's hand you may argue. Sure, but then you deserve to catch xx opposite. Why punt if you have a way of showing an invitational hand if opener has a fit? Roland

I have got two bidding problems for you, well at least I think that one has a problem. 1. ♠ KJ3 ♥ Q8 ♦ Q862 ♣ 10964 Fourth in hand, the opponents are vulnerable, you are not. LHO opens 4♥, double by partner (take-out), pass to you. What is your bid? ---- 2. ♠ void ♥ AKQ863 ♦ K987 ♣ 1097 Third in hand this time; again opps are vul and you are not. Your partner opens a natural 1♣, 4♠ from RHO. Now it's you. Very annoying when they pre-empt, but that's what pre-empts are for. Good luck! Roland

I can't tell you what is right or wrong, but I am on mikeh's side when he chooses a spade for exactly the same reason. There is little left, if anything, for partner, so we must find a passive lead in my opinion. Interestingly, a spade seems more passive than a heart. Partner may have the jack of hearts without the 10 and only four of them, and then we run the risk of presenting declarer with four heart tricks. A spade might work out even if partner doesn't have the 10. The opponents could have a 3-3 or 3-2 fit. The auction suggests that opener is balanced as well when I look at my holdings in the minors. We know that we have five spades, we cannot be certain that partner has five hearts. Hence my choice of a low/middle spade. Roland

♠ J7543 ♥ 82 ♦ Q76 ♣ QJ4 LHO opens a strong club (16+), and RHO responds 2NT (16+ balanced). The next you see is 6NT to your left, all pass. What is your lead, and please let us know what your reasoning is. Roland

If you feel that you are the ugly duckling among the Forum members, there may be a reason for it. You, like everyone else, are entitled to your opinion, but complaining is not the way forward. Being negative never is. I think I am in a position to tell you because I spend hundreds of hours every year working for the BBO community (unpaid needless to say). Roland

Then I suggest that you spend the 10 minutes with something constructive instead of complaining. You even wrote that you had every right to complain. That is: 1. Destructive. 2. Even worse when you don't have time to do anything yourself. Roland

Let me add that I think Elianna did a super job. Too bad that some made her resign. If those "some" think they can do a better job, why don't they volunteer to take over? Criticising is the easiest approach. Doing something about it takes some effort. I agree with all Al_U_Card is saying. Roland

Bidding contests/polls are there for people to exhange views about different approaches to difficult problems. Never mind how many points you score for different actions. That's beside the scope of a contest like this in my opinion. If I think my view is the best under the circumstances, what should I do? Vote according to my belief, and likely get very few points or go with the lot and get loads of points? I have no doubts. Write what you think is best, regardless what other panelists and/or voters may think. Points/marks have little significance in my view. Interesting bidding ideas have. Roland

Standard where? North America? It's not standard in Europe (except Britain perhaps). Here it shows any control: A, K, singleton or void. The Italian way of cue bidding (mixed), 1st or 2nd round control. I strongly recommend that you use that method. There is a world of a difference if responder doesn't know about any kind of control after this auction: 1♥ - 3♥ 4♣ Can opener have ♠K or a singleton? He can if 3♠ only denies the ace, and that will leave responder in the dark. Playing cue bids the Italian way responder will know for sure that opener has no spade control at all, and therefore he has an easy sign off if he doesn't have one either. Roland

Indeed, says one of the panelists. Roland

If my partner passes 2♣, we are unlikely to have missed a game. Feel free to open the hand 1♣ and reverse into 2♦ after a 1MA response if you want (showing 5 clubs and 4 diamonds!). This would not be my approach when I have no problems with showing my suits in the right order. 1♦ - 1♥ 2♣ = Roughly 12-18 hcp with 5+ diamonds and 4+ clubs. Roland

I am much more inclined to supporting a major with three cards if I have weaker holdings than the ones you mention, particularly if I have a singleton. Ruffing losers with high trumps is usually not desirable. 2 J76 AK104 AJ863 1♣ - 1♥ 2♥ This is a hand perfectly suited for a heart raise in my opinion. Roland That's a hand that I would probably open 1D and rebid 2C. And then if my partner corrects to 2D I might venture a 2H bid. In my methods you show a stronger hand on this auction: 1♦ - 1♥ 2♣ - 2♦ 2♥ Something like x AQx KQxxx AQxx Too good to raise 1♥ to 2♥. Roland

I know it is a question for Justin, but let me add that I will not have a problem with rebidding 2♣ after 1♣-1♠ with the hand you give us here. I would feel much more uncomfortable holding x AQJ AQJx Jxxxx Now I think 1♦-1♠; 2♣ is the least of evils. 1♣-1♠; 2♣ looks wrong with that anaemic suit, does it not? Should partner respond 1♥, I will raise to 2♥. With 14 of my 15 hcp in the two suits, 2♥ is a good description. Roland

I am much more inclined to supporting a major with three cards if I have weaker holdings than the ones you mention, particularly if I have a singleton. Ruffing losers with high trumps is usually not desirable. 2 J76 AK104 AJ863 1♣ - 1♥ 2♥ This is a hand perfectly suited for a heart raise in my opinion. Roland

I would hate it too, and it won't happen. But I will not open 1♦ and rebid 2♣ over 1♥. I open 1♣, and my rebid will be 1♠. Roland