Walddk

4♥ is an overbid, but not the worst I have seen in my career. 3♥ shows a good hand (you are vulnerable), and if partner can't bid, you are unlikely to have missed a game. He needs to cover three of your losers. If he can, he won't pass. Roland

"Banning psychics is not bridge" - Jeff Rubens. No one can put it any clearer than that. I agree 100%, as long as those psyches are not based upon a partnership *understanding* (according to Laws of Duplicate Bridge). If you disallow psychic bids, you actually wave goodbye to the game of bridge, since they are allowed according to the Laws. Feel free to call it ... well, "bridge-ish"? Roland

It should be pretty clear that you can't charge an entry fee if you don't follow the Laws of Dupicate Bridge. As far as free tourneys on BBO are concerned, however, TDs can do anything they like in my opinion, as long as it is clearly stated in the Tournament Rules. Quite simple really. Roland

The issue is: if you decide to open light 3rd in hand, at least have a suit! I still claim that West had a clear raise to game. Light and xxxx must be out of the question. Roland

Some players don't like to be watched; fair enough. It happens at all levels, even at expert level. We have had several examples of players refusing to appear on live vugraph in national championships. They can refuse in certain national events, simply because the organisers forgot to make it part of "Conditions of Contest". That will only happen once, I am sure. In my opinion something like this must be stated in all CoCs: "A pair cannot refuse to appear on live vugraph if asked to by the organisers or convenors". Then all participants know in advance, and they can choose not to play in that particular tournament. Roland

I did write "rules are rules", so obviously Italy didn't deserve to qualify. I also used the word "belong" right enough, and I actually thought that my point was clear. Not to Frances it appears. Sorry for my poor English. Mauro got the message though. As an aside, allow me to add that the olympiad is the period (4 years) between two Olympic Games. So no one has ever taken part in any olympiad. Quite a few get that wrong. Frances is one of the many. Roland

If this is how you like to practise your bridge, then, by all means, go ahead. Roland

Agreed. All this thanks to our wonderful staff on site. Norway showed the world last week, Australia are showing us now: It can be done nicely if you work hard. No offence intended, but there are a few organisers in other places in the world who could learn a lot! Roland

I do not see the point in opening light in 3rd suit with a minor and xxxx. If that is not misleading partner, I don't know what is. I would have opened the West hand, yes, but I fully understand that he upgrades ♦QJ next ... and spade #5 of course. One thing is to open light 3rd in hand, another thing is to do it on xxxx. If you really must open that hand, I much prefer 1♠. Passing 1♠ later is not an option in my book with 4-card support. And after the raise to 2♠ you want West to tip-toe and say to himself: "Well, I'd better go easy now. What if partner opened on a balanced 11 count and 4 pips"?. Sorry, that is not on in my world. You all seem to be influenced by looking at both hands here. In real life that is not an option. Roland

East did when he opened! Unless you play 10-12 or 11-13 NT this is not an opening hand. Don't open balanced 11 counts (especially not without intermediates). No blame to West. He had a sound raise to game looking at the 5th spade and ♦QJ. Roland

The Rules of 10, 11 and 12 (leads) have no exceptions, provided that partner is able to find his 3rd, 4th and 5th highest card in the suit he chooses to lead from :rolleyes: Roland

Iceland won in Yokohama, Japan, in 1991 but did not qualify for Santiago, Chile, the year after. Similarly, Italy won the World Youth Championships in Paris, France, in 2003 but did not qualify for Sydney. Roland

I honestly thought that no one taught their students "quick tricks" any more, but I am wrong apparently. Of course aces and kings are worth more than queens and jacks, but as far as I'm concerned, you can forget all about "quick tricks" when you consider whether to open or not. Dump "quick" and concentrate on "tricks" and "losers"! Tricks don't always have to come "quick(ly)". Slowly is fine with me as long as they come. Roland

The discussion is funny, but pretty futile, because bridge is a partnership game. Let Benito Garozzo play with Harvey Smith from Fletton, England, and Sabine Auken with Elinor Jones from Dayton, Pennsylvania. How will they fare? Just as well as Fred Gitelman with Heike Schmidt from Biberach in Germany, and Debbie Rosenberg with Francesco Aramba from Tomelloso, Spain. Roland P.S. My sincere apologies if Harvey Smith, Elinor Jones, Heike Schmidt and Francesco Aramba exist in those areas. No offence intended.

Quite right Gerben. It is of course a shame that Italy are not where they belong, but rules are rules, and they did have a very disappointing EC in Prague last summer. Roland

This just goes to show that the concept of quick tricks is an illusion. Which of the following two hands do you prefer to open with: KQJxx KQ10xx xx x (my example above) or Axxx Axx xxx Axx 2 quick tricks versus 3 quick tricks as I understand it. Does this mean that Hand 2 is better than Hand 1? Obviously not, since Hand 1 a priori has 5 losers whereas Hand 2 has nine! Roland

I think we made it pretty clear. We (I at least) disagree with 6NT. The other bids are just fine. Roland

6NT, a serious overbid. 3♥ by East is fair; he is cramped for room and therefore under pressure. Don't punish him. Roland

I'm glad you use the word "should". I can assure you that this is not the case. I have been teaching bridge players at all levels for more than 30 years, so I "should" know what I am talking about. Maybe the level of intermediate players is higher in USA, but I doubt it. I have seen enough of real life as well as online bridge to determine that this is not so. Let me put it as clearly as I possible can: squeezes are not for beginners/intermediates! Nothing is too obvious, but something is too difficult. Roland

Congratulations on having executed an automatic squeeze. Please accept my apologies in advance (I certainly don't mean to spoil the fun), but Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion is hardly the forum for squeezes. I am convinced that this has never been Ben's intention. You may agree or disagree, but I claim that the vast majority of beginners and intermediates don't master the basics, so what is the point of introducing squeezes before they do? I have said this a few times in earlier posts: It's like trying to run before you can even crawl. It doesn't work in real life, and it's no different at the bridge table. Roland

7♥ and 7NT are not exactly the grand slams you want to be in. 7♣ is. Roland

Personally, I think the concept of quick tricks is a thing of the past. Don't we all open 1♠ on KQJxx KQ10xx xx x I can't find many QT, but I like the hand (for the time being) and think it's a clear opener. Roland

hmmmmm Let me guess. Could it be because your bidding, dummy play and defence do not bear close examination? :rolleyes: Roland

I don't agree. Facing a passed partner, opener's pass should always show exactly 3-card support. With 4 he should support, and with less he must bid something else. It's a crime to pass with a doubleton, hence often violating Burn's excellent Law of Total Trumps. Roland