Walddk

Non-competitive auctions when you hold a 16 count obviously! So without intent you just made a perfect point: opening 1♣ with that hand is likely to get you into trouble. Roland

I don't have a problem with rebidding 1NT after 1♣ - 1♠, Matt. If I am outside my range, I am perfectly happy to rebid 1NT with a singleton honour - not just any singleton. I even know of people (Richie Reisig is one of those) who gladly rebid 1NT with a small singleton. Now I am dealt a king even. No qualms at my end. Roland

I certainly do call it a misdescription if you start by opening that hand 1♦, or 1♣ for that matter. 1. 1♦ followed by 2♣ over a 1♠ response is definitely a misdescription. You don't have 5-4 as promised. You have 4-5 and want partner to work that out. 2. 1♣ followed by 2♣ over a 1♠ response is also a misdescription, because K AKJ Kxxx Qxxxx is neither 5 diamonds and 4 clubs (1♦ followed by 2♣), nor a one-suited hand with clubs (2♣ rebid if you open 1♣). The latter is worse with 2 of your 16 hcp in a 5-card suit. The first isn't much better with the wrong shape and 5 hcp among 16 in the two suits. Let me add another interesting aspect. By opening 1 of a minor you show something in the region of 10-21 hcp with at least 3 cards in the suit opened. Why is it that I prefer to open 1NT to show 15-17 hcp, in principle balanced, rather than the wide-ranged 1 of a minor? Because it makes it so much easier for my partner after just one bid by opener. Don't we all want to open 1NT as often as possible? That is exactly why I think that 1NT is the only sensible option with that hand. Roland

A few months ago playing on BBO, Fred Gitelman had this hand: K AKJ Kxxx Qxxxx Correct, the same as I posted earlier. Fred opened 1NT. Afterwards he said: "Nothing is ideal with this hand, but I think 1NT is the most sensible choice". I obviously agree as you saw before, and I went one step further when I added that 1NT is the only sensible option in my opinion. I am not sure what whereagles wants me to say when I think that it is. Everyone's entitled to his/her opinion; I hope that applies to me too. A spade is a spade, and a notrump is a notrump. Introctrination? Not at all. I just voice my opinion. Isn't that what this forum is for? Roland

What a shame. Playing a 15-17 1NT I think 1NT is the only sensible option with K AKJ Kxxx Qxxxx So you bid clubs and clubs or diamonds and clubs to show 2 suits with at least 9 cards? Well, fine, you have 5 of your 16 hcp there, a genuine misdescription of the hand if you ask me. In my opinion it's much better to pretend that you have one spade more and one club less and open 1NT. Roland

As a rule of thumb as far as pre-empting is concerned: bid as if you would have if you had been dealer. Would you have pre-empted in first seat? Yes. Should you do the same in second seat after an opening? Yes! 4♠ would be a popular choice although you, in theory, have 7 losers, but holding a 9-card suit breaks almost any rule (counting only 2 losers in the spade suit is a fair shot). Isn't there a risk that you may go for 1100 if partner can't produce just one trick? There is, but if that is the case, the opponents must be cold for slam - a score that will yield more than the 1100 you concede. When pre-empting partner should not expect just one trick on defence, whereas a simple overcall (1♠) shows a much better hand. Does that sound like a contradiction? It may, but another good rule is: "quick in, quick out". With bad cards, bid as high as you can "afford" according to your agreement. The higher you bid, the weaker you are. Your hand is only any good offensively. If you had overcalled 4♠, your partner should not double them in 5♥. He will most likely bid 5♠, and then you will get doubled. No big deal; it will cost 200. Yes, with open cards EW can make 6♥, but I don't think they will bid it over 5♠, and if they do, they will have to make it first. Roland

I do indeed speak for myself, but I also believe that you belong to the tiny minority, Todd. We haven't made a survey, but rest assured that very few among our spectators would welcome HUM systems. We even have very capable commentators who refuse to be there if the systems "get out of hand", as they put it. Anyway, let's move further down the front page if we are to discuss this topic. It belongs under Vugraph Issues, and it's entirely my fault for bringing it up here. Roland

Regarding the BB, VC and SB the times will be a lot better for North America. Only the first match of the day is pretty hopeless (5 am in New York). This time the Aussies are going to suffer, because only that particular round will suit *them*. Since the event takes place in Europe it's obvious that the times are much better for Europeans: 11.00, 15:00 and 18:30 Paris time generally. A provisional BBO timetable is to be found at http://online.bridgebase.com/vugraph/schedule.php Roland

From a spectator perspective it is no doubt a good thing that people don't play anything too fancy, especially if the commentators are too "lazy" to go through the systems in advance, or even look them up while play is in progress. No offence intended, because .... You can only ask that much from unpaid volunteers who spend hundreds of hours week after week in order to make vugraph broadcasts a little more colourful. It's a completely different matter if you were an on site commentator where fees are involved. Our 138 volunteer commentators do a great job as it is, some more often than others. They also have a living to attend to, but this is probably a topic for another forum here. Roland

My personal opinion is that even if HUM systems were allowed in the round-robin, you would not see many pairs using them, which perhaps would be an argument for not prohibit HUM. If the deadline for submitting HUM systems is say 2 months, there is no reason why you should not have time to make a proper defence, a defence you are even allowed to bring to the table in writing. You don't have to remember anything by heart. The only thing you need to make sure of is that all participating teams are known 2 months prior to the event. Anyway, my guess is that it would be a minor problem, because very few pairs play HUM systems, and I doubt that many more would even if those systems were allowed in the preliminary rounds. Roland

Not sure what is normal for you, Hog, but if you play Garozzo, A and Q are the cards that ask for attitude, K for unblock or count. Either is fine with me, you just need an agreement. In this case sceptic's partner seemed to have an agreement with herself, and that's not quite enough. Roland

One thing to add here. If your partner claims that you should have unblocked the jack, she is also saying that you have a specific agreement, i.e. that you must unblock an honour (A, Q or J) when a king is led against a NT contract. Did you have that agreement? If yes, you failed to unblock the jack. If no, you must encourage as clearly as possible. Playing standard signals that would be the 7 with your holding, because the 9 could cost a trick as others have pointed out. 6 or 7, doesn't matter to you, but it matters to partner in certain instances. But then again, it matters little if she thinks you have denied the jack when you didn't unblock it. She was afraid of continuing diamonds into declarer's AJ tenace, also known as the Bath Coup. Since you are from England, Wayne, you would know where Bath is located. Right, in the county of Somerset. Roland

Pass is clear to me. I showed my hand when i bid 2♠. Now it's up to partner to decide. Only he knows why he bid 4♠. There is nothing forcing about my pass now. Roland

Must be since psyches do not violate any law as long as they are not based upon a partnership understanding. Psyches are part of the game, and as we have said so many times before: TDs who disallow psyches do not follow the Laws of Duplicate Bridge. It's as simple as that. Take it (play in those tourneys) or leave it (don't play in those tourneys). Roland

I like the auction until your partner bid 5♣. She should have bid 4♠ as natural (delayed doubleton support) and denying a heart control. Remember that she already denied 3-card spade support when she raised to 4♣. Why is 4♠ not a cue bid for clubs you may ask. Because it's a good agreement that you look for the best *game* first. When a major is opener's longer suit, 4♠ should be (semi)natural with a hand that can take no more action. Then you would be happy to pass. If you frequently make a jump shift on a 3-card minor in order to establish a game force, 4♣ is less attractive. Then 3♦ would be the alternative, and that will also lead you to the top spot: 1♠ - 1N 3♣ - 3♦ 3♠ - 4♠ p Roland

Does this mean that you have to play another system in the round robin ? Seems ridiculous !! :huh: :huh: Alain You got it right. Read here: During the Round Robin stage of the Bermuda Bowl and Venice Cup ° If the matches are 16 boards or fewer, HUM systems and Brown Sticker Conventions will be prohibited. ° If the matches are longer (17-20 boards) • HUM systems are still prohibited Brown Sticker Conventions will be permitted, with a maximum of three per pair During the Knockout stage of the Bermuda Bowl and Venice Cup HUM systems or Brown Sticker Conventions will be authorized for use in the knockout stage in both the Bermuda Bowl and Venice Cup provided additional, separate convention cards, including proposed defences are submitted in full accordance with the systems regulations published in the Supplemental Conditions of Contest. • Special seating restrictions will be in force for pairs using Brown Sticker Conventions or HUM Systems at any stage. .... Roland

Is this too difficult? OK, let me give a hint to the beginners and intermediates. This contract is 100% certain to make if you choose the right line, given that trumps are 2-1, and they are as I said in my first post. (advanced/experts, hidden text please). Roland

[hv=d=e&v=e&n=sj42hkj63dq53cj109&s=sa105ha74dakj10942c]133|200|Scoring: IMP 5D by South[/hv] You have arrived in the excellent 5♦ after an uncontested auction. West leads ♣K. Many chances to come to 11 tricks, and you would consider yourself a bit unlucky if you go down. Plan the play. Trumps are 2-1 in case that is of any help to you. (Advanced/expert players please use hidden text if you feel like making a contribution). Roland

Double, take-out, not four spades. Excellent description of that hand. Then you have 3♦ available for 5-5 and 6-5 hands. Whether a double is for take-out or penalties you may want to adopt this rule: Doubles of low-level contracts are for take-out unless it's obvious that the opponents have a misfit, or if preceded by a redouble. Opps have a fit here, so forget about penalties already. It's 100% take-out; whether partner leaves it in at MP is a different story altogether. I just hope she knows what she's doing B) Roland

Soon coming to a Vugraph theatre near you: the Bermuda Bowl starring Fulvio Fantoni & Claudio Nunes :P Quite right, but I never claimed to know their system. I do know, however, that a 1♠ response to 1♥ shows 0-9 hcp, so 1♥ must indeed be forcing. 14+ hcp I think it is. But rest assured that the East-West pair in question (intermediate players) did not play Fantunes. Roland

I think East's pass of 1♥ is perfectly normal. After all 1♥ is not forcing in any system I know. I also think his double is reasonable. He is looking at two certain trump tricks, a solid suit that can't be picked up for less than two losers. 9 of opener's high card points were in hearts, and they only produced one trick. A little unlucky I would say. But even then the contract could have been defeated. Which defence do you think West would have found if East had passed 4♠? Right, ♥AK without much thought. A capable declarer would now make the contract once he discovers that spades are 0-4. Exactly as it happened here. I think it's unfair to criticize East for getting the defence wrong. West had the chance, but he continued with an "automatic" second high heart in a split second. Maybe he should have taken stock and tried to figure out which layout is more likely. I honestly think that a good defender would have found the answer after East's double rather than if he had passed. Roland

The requirements are clearly stated here: Explore Bridge ---> Bridge Library ---> English ---> Award symbols in your profile. Roland

[hv=d=w&v=e&n=s54h9862da94cakq2&w=shakq104dkj82cj1097&e=sqj109hj53d1075c543&s=sak87632h7dq63c86]399|300|Scoring: IMP S: 4S doubled Lead: Ace of hearts[/hv] Here is the full hand. West opened 1♥ passed to South who jumped to 3♠ and was raised to game, doubled by East. When East followed with the 3 at trick 1, it suggested that South had a singleton. East must clearly have doubled on good spades (remember that he passed 1♥, so he has less than 6 hcp), presumably two certain tricks, but for his jump to the 3-level, South is likely to have 7 spades. What you must be careful about is that you don't let declarer score too many ruffs with small trumps, thus reducing his trump length. Let us see what happens if you carelessly ("automatically"?) continue with a high heart at trick 2. South ruffs and gets the bad news when he cashes ♠A. He enters dummy with a club and ruffs another heart. Back to dummy with a club to the king, and he pitches a diamond on ♣Q. He now leads dummy's last heart, and East can't gain anything by ruffing. If he does, declarer just pitches another diamond loser ("loser on loser") and is home directly. So East pitches a diamond, South ruffs, and dummy is entered again with a diamond to the ace. This is the 4-card ending after South has taken 8 of the first 9 tricks: [hv=d=w&v=e&n=s54h9862da94cakq2&w=shakq104dkj82cj1097&e=sqj109hj53d1075c543&s=sak87632h7dq63c86]399|300|Scoring: IMP S: 4S doubled Lead: Ace of hearts[/hv] When dummy's ♣2 is led, East is exposed to a "coup en passant", and no matter what he does, declarer will score one of his small trumps and the contract. Now, could the contract have been defeated? Yes, a club switch at trick 2 knocks out one of dummy's entries prematurely. South loses the tempo and can't achieve the proper ending. The result will be 1 down. Feel free to try yourself if you don't believe me. Roland

Partner does not have KQJx in spades. Why? He passed 1♥. So let's assume that he has less than 6 hcp. Roland

I do actually, and furthermore, I do not think that your sensible partner would double 4♠ on say J109x x xxxx xxxx Does your 1♥ opening promise at least 3 defensive tricks? Finally, if you think he has a hand like this, why did you switch to ♦K at trick 2 as stated in your previous post? Then you know that declarer's heart losers go away on dummy's high clubs. Was ♦K a typo? Did you mean ♥K? Roland