Walddk

If not prearranged, why would Buratti have paid attention to the 3 fingers? Purely coincidental? Roland

Any method might work out when you finally get a hand like this (don't hold your breath), but I prefer 3NT to be a pre-empt in either minor. They come up more frequently than the hand posted here. The only purpose you should not use 3NT for is to show a solid minor. I agree with Fred when he says: "If you open 3NT, you should only do it if you do not wish to play there". Roland

As far as I'm concerned they can dump all alerts. If I'm interested, I will ask, and if I'm not I will wait until the auction is over and when I'm on lead. Even then I may not be interested. In f2f bridge I often ask non experienced partnerships to skip the alerts altogether. The alerts help them more than they help us. Having said all this, however, I obviously respect local alert procedure no matter where in the world I am. There is no standard procedure, so it's a good idea to become familiar with the one in force where you play at any given time. Roland

Definitely. 1♠ is clearcut. It is rarely right to let the opponents play in a suit contract at the 1-level. If they want to declare, they've got to bit more than this. But 1♠ shows 5, doesn't it, you may argue. It does indeed, unless you don't have 5! Roland

4th best lead: The Rule of 11 applies. 3rd best lead: The Rule of 12 applies. 5th best lead: The Rule of 10 applies. These are all mathematical calculations. When playing 3rd for example: Subtract the spot card from 12, and the result gives the number of cards higher than the one led in the other three hands. Similarly, if playing 5th leads: Subtract the spot card from 10, and the result gives the number of cards higher than the one led in the other three hands. Since these are a mathematical formulas, they are rules without exceptions. Try it yourself. Also with the Rule of 11 (4th best leads). No exceptions. It is obviously allowed to lead 3rd and 5th instead of 4th. Many partnerships have that agreement, especially against suit contracts. Many also retreat to 4th best against notrump. You are entitled to deviate from your agreements with partner as long as they are not based upon a partnership understanding. If you don't follow the rules you agreed with your partner, he will be fooled as much as declarer, and in the long run it is a bad idea not to stick to your agreements. It's simply bad for partnership morale. But it's not cheating. Personally, I like to play 3rd and 5th leads against suit as well as notrump with the following addition: I play 2nd and 4th through declarer. This has worked very well for me. On the other hand, you don't stop playing bridge just because you have a set of rules. Take this suit as an example: AQ92 Say you agreed on 3rd and 5th leads, also against notrump and you want to lead from that combination. The "correct" card to lead is then the 9 spot, but that could be quite expensive (could easily cost a trick), so most would lead the 2 nevertheless. Hope you got what you were looking for, Wayne. Roland

Iceland got their independence from Denmark on June 17, 1944 as you may recall. We have no plans of invading the nice country in the foreseeable future. Canada, however ..... Roland

The whole idea of cue bidding is not to bypass game when neither of us controls a side suit (1st or 2nd round control). It's very easy to achieve that goal with responder's hand. Roland

Well, if you are a masochist you certainly should. On the other hand, I bet you have volunteered to be the operator at the table where the women are. There is a reason for everything. Say hi to Heather, Michelle, Nicola and the others for me! ;) Roland

Typical Canadian; they can't see through the cards, and yet they want to steal our island! If you spend your time learning how to see through the cards, you would have less time to violate the simplest of rules: let the sea gulls on Hans Ø alone!

Is 1♠ forcing? Come on, there must be a limit. Yes, we may have 4♥ on, too bad. It's much more likely that patner's rebid over 1NT is 3♠ or 4♠. I don't even like to think about it. Roland

Too good to be true as you rightly point out, but then it's beyond me to see why you want to force this to the unsafe 5-level and concede points if you are just a little unlucky. Let me repost the example I gave earlier. xxxx KQx Qx xxxx I don't think any of us would want to be in 5♠ now. Roland

Sounds fair enough, but 4♦ would actually give the same message (no club control). It is as serious as 3NT in this context since I waste my time cue bidding opposite a partner who has already signed off opposite a limit hand with a singleton heart. Roland

Definitely not! Hans Ø is ours and will remain ours until the end of time. You can have all the Danish (pastries) you like, but our island? Never! We are at war with Canada, and if I were you I would tremble in my boots! Roland

Inquiry 2 over 1 uses 2NT artificially as a MAJOR suit raise in a lot of situations. The basic situation is after partner opens 1H or 1S. Here 2NT shows a four card fit (or three cards with 16+ hcp, and no side five card suit) and limit raise or STRONGER hand. Only two example auctions, 1H-2NT, and 1S-2NT. I thought I might go a step further than my earlier post and explain why 2NT is a strong raise, and show how the auction might continue. I use 2NT on many auctions as a strong major raise. So not only is Jacoby 2NT used by responder, a jump to 2NT by opener after 1m-1M-2NT shows big support In fact, it is the strongest STRONGEST fit showing response. Examples are 1C-1H-2NT, 1D-1H-2NT, 1C-1S-2NT, 1D-1S-2NT. Also, in competition, where one or the other partner has bid a major 2NT with a jump is also such a raise. A "slow 2NT" preceded by a pass, or a bid of a different suit, is not (obviously) Jacboy 2NT plus. The responding scheme to this 2NT is pretty much the same regardless of how it is issued. ---> 2NT Jacoby 2NT Plus --------> 3C, no game interest or monster slam interest --------> 3D, Game interest, no slam interest, but better than 4M ---------------> 3H now ask partner to show shortness anyway. --------> 3H, ask for 2NT bidder to show shortness if you have -------> 3S short in "other major" -------> 4C/4C short in bid suit (if not bid before naturally) -------> 4M Just enough for game, no more There is a minor tweak of this scheme after 1m-1M-2NT, which is allowable since opener has shown his minor suit... 1C - 1M ----------> 2NT Jacoby 2NT by opener, strong game try or game force ---------------> 3C will not accept game try --------------------> 3D re-game try (reponder can accept or decline) --------------------> 3OM ask for shortness, GF --------------------> 3M signoff --------------------> 3NT always choice contracts 4M and 3NT --------------------> 4C spinter in other major, still slam try (if open 1C) --------------------> 4D diamond splinter, still slam try ---------------> 3D Accept game try, no slam interest ---------------> 3H Slam interst, asking opener for shortness, 3S low, 4C upper ---------------> 3S splinter in other major ---------------> 3NT - splinter in other minor ---------------> 4C - second suit very strong slam try ---------------> 4D - second suit very strong slam try This is identical to 1D - 1M 2NT, except that now openers 4C/4D meanings are reversed if responder bids 3C. How would this affect this hand? If partner bids anything but 3C, slam is almost certain (checking just for club control). Over 3C (no game interest), you don't have to give up on slam yet. You can now bid 3H (splinter) to start cue-bidding. This splinter (since you didn't splinter immediately) can be singleton ace of void, and can include a control in clubs. In fact it has to be one of those. Or you can bid 3D "game try) then four diamonds over partners signoff, pinpointing need for club control. If partner accepts the 3D game try, he does so generally by cue-bidding in case you are huge. So if he bids 4D, give up... in 4S. I am sure this method is very good Ben, but let me with frank with you and others: It's too much to remember for the "average" bridge player. I consider myself above average, and it's definitely too much for me. Roland

You don't seem to see the danger of forcing the auction to the 5-level (read my previous post). Ben's or my method is far superior, also compared to a 4♦ rebid. Roland

I wasn't paying attention at the time (mainly thanks to the loads of private chat messages I get :( ), but it is quite possible that time was an issue. Another possibility is that our operator made a "false" claim. That happens from time to time and is perfectly understandable. It is very demanding to be a vugraph operator, especially if you are on for several consecutive sessions. Roland

That is exactly why 4♦ is not a good bid in my opinion. I want to learn about the club cue bid, or lack of it, below game level. The 5-level isn't safe opposite for example xxxx KQx Qx xxxx Roland

No, 2♥ is just a normal reverse with at least 4-5 in the red suits. You should save 3♥ for a splinter (singleton). The strong 5-6 hand can be shown on your next turn by rebidding 3♥. Example: 1♦ - 1♠ 2♥ - 2NT 3♥ Roland P.S. What is Nasi Lemak under my picture? I want to be sure that I don't violate any law.

3♥. Not ideal to splinter with a singleton ace, but this hand is too good for 4♠. In my method (mini-splinters) it is at least invitational with a singleton heart. Now you can distinguish between a singleton and a void (4♥). If my partner rebids 3♠ over 3♥ (sign off opposite an invite), I will follow up with 4♦. Now I think I got my message across. Roland

I think it's a bad idea to break the transfer with 3-card support. Roland

Commentators usually don't have time to respond to private chat messages. No offence intended. We (I more than anyone else) get dozens if not hundreds during vugraph broadcasts, so it is simply impossible to focus on the bridge if we must reply to those messages too. Co-commentators to filter the questions? When someone invents a 26-hour day, I will be happy to look for more commentators than already needed. Roland

I think it's better to let re-transfers be on, because the strong hand is more likely to have AQ and/or KJ tenace(s) to protect. Roland

You need an agreement about break of transfers. There are several ways of doing it, one of which is: Transfer to hearts: 2♠: Worthless doubleton*), 4-card support, maximum. 2N: 4-card support, maximum, no worthless doubleton. 3♣: Worthless doubleton, 4-card support, maximum. 3♦: Worthless doubleton, 4-card support, maximum. 3♥: 4-card support, minimum. *) Jx or worse. Re-transfer applies when possible. .... Transfer to spades: 2N: 4-card support, maximum, no worthless doubleton. 3♣: Worthless doubleton, 4-card support, maximum. 3♦: Worthless doubleton, 4-card support, maximum. 3♥: Worthless doubleton, 4-card support, maximum. 3♠: 4-card support, minimum. Re-transfer applies when possible. I am not saying that this is the best, but it's playable. Roland

Til lykke med fødselsdagen, og gid dine sokker ikke må krympe i vask! :) Roland

Agreed, but they are not here to tell us, because their English is inadequate or even non-existent. I am 100% convinced, however, that an overwhelming majority of users from Poland, Turkey, Italy and probably France too would appreciate their mother tongue when possible. The best evidence I can give is that we have several hundreds of spectators at the tables where we provide Polish and Italian commentary, and about half of those numbers when we offer French. Roland