Walddk

That's too much to hope for. They won't sit for it, and if they do, it will probably make! Roland

4♠. RHO has a solid minor and ♠Kx(x). Nice to know that the spade finesse is on. Double is waste of time, since rigthy will pull to 4 of his minor if lefty hasn't done it already (4♣ pass or correct). There is a case for pass, however, as long as partner is on the same wavelength. I will lead ♥A and get to his hand in one of the red suits (depending on dummy and partner's signal at trick 1). If only he will lead a spade through next. Can I rely on that? Roland

Latest Ladbroke odds: 2/13 against, so don't bet on it ;) Roland

Possibly, but I was only 6 years old when they wrote it, so they didn't ask me to rephrase it. Roland

The 2♦ overcall actually started all the problems in my opinion. As his partner I, naively perhaps, expect that he has something when he ventures an overcall at the 2-level vulnerable. High cards alone don't win any tricks for your side on offence. Long, strong suits do. Roland

I am not suggesting anything. As long as you don't violate any law, it's my deepest belief that you must be able to voice your opinion. If you violate a law, however, I also think that you must be held responsible - before a court of justice even if need be. This is a belief that is so profound that nobody can take it away from me. I don't have to agree with everything people are saying (and heaven knows I don't), but it is no crime to express one's views, as long as no law is violated. Roland

Quote: The worst bid by EW was... One option missing in the poll: "All of them". That gets my vote. The rest will get -99 (I give them 1 point for "artistic impression"). :) Roland

As a citizen in a country that was occupied for five years during World War II, it gives me goose bumps to hear the word "censorship". Let me quote from the Constitution of the Kingdom of Denmark: Censur og andre forebyggende forholdsregler kan ingensinde påny indføres. This translates to: Censorship and other preventive measures can never be reintroduced. I accept that the BBO Forums are not ruled by our constitution, but I find it sad that an entire thread is deleted as a consequence of one or more insulting or defamatory posts (I don't even know what they are). Maybe we are just paranoid. Roland

I have been playing that method for ages. In Denmark it's known as "Nær/Fjern" (Near/Far). The suit nearer to yourself = 4th suit and forcing, in this case spades. Now you have 3♥/♠ available as non-forcing. 3♦ is forcing with heart support. Roland

Where have I seen that diamond combination before? Are you sure your GIB partner didn't peek and sent smoke signals through the room? Roland

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=s32haq97dj1083cq104&w=sak7hkjdkq7542c96&e=sj84h108d96cak8732&s=sq10965h65432dacj5]399|300|Scoring: IMP W: 3NT[/hv] European Youth Team Championships 2005, Italy. Denmark v Turkey Table 1: ♥7, 8, 6, J ♣9, 4, 2, J ♥2, K, A, 10 ♥Q, ♦6, ♥3, ♦2 ♥9, ♠4, ♥4, ♦4 North had paid close attention to the way South played his hearts (2, 3, 4) and trusted his partner. So he switched to ♦J. South won the ace, cashed ♥5, and the contract went 2 down. Table 2: ♥Q, 8, 6, K ♣9, 4, 2, J ♥3, J, A, 10 ♥9 ♥7 To these tricks South followed with the 4 and 5. North knew of course that partner still had ♥2, so suit preference signals for a spade, right? He duly switched to a spade! Curtains. Poor South got squeezed in spades and diamonds, and the "impossible" 3NT rolled in. 13 IMPs to Denmark. A holding of 65432 is best suited for poker, agreed, but spot cards are pretty important at bridge too. You can hardly find a better example than this. Roland

Very true Luis. If partner has an ace, the contract will go two down, provided ... well..... I will bring the full layout a little later today. Roland

Fine with me if you want to dump alerts altogether, but if you decide to keep them, I can't see the wisdom if you must alert natural bids as well. Roland

Card showing double. "I have some high cards partner, but no clear direction". Roland

The term "optional double" is an illusion. Either a double is for penalties or it's for take-out. Both doubles would be for take-out. Partner can pass my second take-out double, sure, just like he could have passed my first double, but both doubles are still for take-out. There is nothing optional. It's a term from about 50 years ago. Another example: 3♥ X I see many describe this double as an "optional" double. No it's not, it's a take-out double again. If partner leaves it in, it is his problem, but the double will remain a take-out double. Roland

You don't seem to see the danger if you must alert a natural as well as an artificial 2♠. Say you alert 2♠ because it's natural. What do you think LHO will assume? That it's a transfer to clubs or MSS and that he will get one more chance. Much to his surprise the auction is over after pass, pass, pass. Who do you think has been damaged now? Did the alert of the natural 2♠ help him? No, on the contrary! It is plain daft if you must alert 2♠ whether it's natural or a transfer to clubs, or MSS or whatever. This adds to the confusion. The search you are asking for doesn't interest me one bit. I want to play bridge, and alerting natural bids is not part of that in my opinion. Roland

If 2♠ showing spades is unusual, then I don't understand the word "unusual". It seems much more unusual to me that it shows clubs. A spade is a spade, especially when it's not alerted! Roland

Well, you got that wrong. Hamlet was the Prince of Denmark who suggested to build a bridge between Denmark and Sweden. His prayers were heard. It happened 399 years later. Roland

Sad attitude.... The purpose of an alet structure is to provide the opponents with useful information. Given the enormous number of artificial treatments in use, flagging bids as "natural" or "artificial" doesn't tell the oppoentns anything. I'd prefer not to have any alerts rather than adopt an alert "artificial" treatments strucutre. This case is a perfect example. VERY few pairs play natural suit bids over NT openings. The 2S response clearly caught the opponents by surprise. They deserve some warning that the response is non-forcing. I disagree strongly. If I bid a natural 2♠, it is more than silly if I have to tell my opponents that it is natural. Do you also want me to alert my 1♥-opening next time? It shows hearts and not spades! What you are saying is that I must alert my 2♠ bid whether it's natural or a transfer to clubs. I am lost. Is this a contest of bridge or alert skills I wonder. Roland

Not only that; now the Canadians also want to steal our precious island "Hans Ø" near Greenland. I herby declare war between Denmark and Canada! A warship with a 12 mm canon is on its way and will arrive by the end of August (weather permitting). Hope this intimidates you. Roland

I'll give up on anything related to bridge, except the weekly game with and against my python, bird spider and canary. They don't demand alerts of natural bids. Roland

I am sorry, but the day the authorities demand that I start alerting my natural bids (self-alerting) or my partner's (f2f with no screens), I am out of it for good. Roland

Yes, 2♠ should be very sound raise to 3♦ because responder can't have a spade suit on the auction (1NT response to the 1♦-opening), but who invented the term "courtesy raise"? I didn't ask my partner to bid politely, I asked him to bid his hand. So 3♦ should not be a bunch of rubbish. We use pass for those hands where I come from. 2♦ is as forcing as 1♥ was, i.e. non-forcing. Roland

I agree with Mike; pass is probably with the odds in the long run, especially if they are vulnerable. However, I have a feeling that at the table I would still bid 1NT. The reason might be that I believe I declare less badly than I defend. Roland