Walddk

I will just ignore East, whatever he is up to and bid 4♣. I have a great hand. Roland

18+ hcp (17 very good) with 5+ spades. 3NT is my next bid. 1♠ overcall first and double next will show 5 spades and short hearts, 15-16 hcp. Roland

Good point, but I am sure that beginners/intermediates are reluctant to support unless they are certain of an 8-card fit. It takes years to understand the benefits of supporting with only 3, and as you may know, it is considered a major crime to do just that in some parts of the world. Roland

Agree with 1eyedjack and will add that your next double shows close to an opening hand (or better). Your first double could have been as little as 8 hcp when you have both minors. Some play that double after 1♠ (2♥) doesn't promise more than 4-3 either way in the minors. Roland

1. (18)19-21 balanced. A hand too good to overcall 1NT on his first turn. With a weak balanced hand he must pass 1♠. If he doubled with the wrong shape (less than 3 spades), he must take his own medicine and pass now. He can't bid again without showing a very strong hand. 2. 1♠ (0-8 in theory) was a slight underbid. I would have bid more, but now I must make up for it. I will jump to 3♦, which must show that I am maximum for my initial response and therefore be game forcing opposite what is (should be) 18+ hcp. It's an area where inexperienced players often make a mistake. They double regardless of shape as soon as they have 12 hcp, where they should have overcalled (own preference) or passed (shape not suited for an overcall or a take-out double). Roland

As you all know, we have this discussion on numerous occasions. I suggest the following mandatory table notes: Table note 1: "We do not follow the Laws of Duplicate Bridge and adjust, or don't adjust, as we see fit". Well, fine, then you know if you want to sign up or not. Table note 2: "We do our utmost to base our rulings on the Laws of Duplicate Bridge". Also fine, then you can expect to be treated as you should be. However, there is one serious problem: if all TDs/Hosts would be honest with themselves, there would be about 5-10 tourneys a day in the latter category! Sad but true. Roland

The benefits are that 1♠ is always natural and forcing for one round, and not ambiguous as in 4th suit. Accordingly, 2♠ is also only one-way: 4th suit without four spades. I am flexible, I play whatever partner is comfortable with. Roland

Of course WJS are legal, and you did absolutely nothing wrong. On the contrary, you even alerted your 2♠ bid and explained when asked. Unfortunately another example of how the opponents think they know better. Threatening you is uncalled for. Period. Roland

In 6♠ and 6NT by West, certainly! Roland

I like your reasoning and 3♠ at matchpoints. To whereagles: 3♠ is not a jump bid. 2♦ is obviously a typo. Should have been 3♦. A couple of you may have forgotten that this is pairs, and I agree with plaur that it's worth trying 3♠ for three reasons. 1. It scores better if we have a 5-3 fit. 2. Responder doesn't have 6 spades. 2♣ denied that. 3. If we don't have a fit, opener can still correct to 4♣. Roland

Maybe have a look at this (again). I wrote that yesterday, so forget about J10 or J10x hearts. Roland

I was merely commenting on Wayne's last point. So yes, this is my opinion. Excuse me, but answers to the other questions he asks would be much too difficult for beginners and intermediates to comprehend anyway. Most advanced players and a few self-proclaimed experts are in the same boat. Again, no offence intended. Roland

No offence intended, but is this not a Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion Forum? May I suggest that you spend more time on what a 1♠ rebid shows on an auction like 1♦ - 1♥ 1♠ 1. Point range? 2. Length in diamonds and spades? 3. How many hearts? 4. Balanced or unbalanced? Back to basics, yes, but what's wrong with that? Save the sophisticated conventions for later ... much later! Free piece of advice. Roland

I have no power to ban people from the BBO Forums, but rest assured that you will never become a vugraph commentator if you have the nerve to use the most naughty F-word of them all <_< Roland

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=s32haq97dj1083cq104&e=sj84h108d96cak8732]266|200|Scoring: IMP W: 3NT Lead: H7[/hv] One of the most interesting defensive problems during our broadcasts from the recent European Youth Team Championships in Italy arose on this deal in the match between Denmark and Turkey. Pass from South, 1NT (15-17) 3NT by West-East. You decide to lead ♥7, and declarer wins with the jack. Next comes ♣9 and you duck smoothly (where did we see that Q10x combination before?). Declarer plays low from dummy, and your partner's jack scores. He obediently returns a heart to declarer's king and your ace. When you cash ♥Q, West pitches a diamond, and yet another one on your 9. Yes, it's annoying. The heart suit was blocked from the start, but that can't be helped. However, the spotlight is on you now. What do you next? A spade, a diamond or perhaps a passive club? How do you get partner in to cash the setting trick in hearts? Does it matter? (Maybe Fluffy should refrain from answering since he should know the hand). Roland

I just thought you meant what you wrote in a previous post too. How silly I am. Roland

Is it because your holding in diamonds is particularly suited for that, or is it perhaps because you think you're a better declarer than your partner? x Axxx Kx AKxxxx Is ♦A always on side for you? If it's not, and you are at least one down in a contract that has about a 75% chance of making on a diamond lead if played by your partner, maybe you think he's impressed when you tell him: "Sorry, partner, how could I know that I wrong-sided the contract? I liked the lead in 3NT coming up to me, not through me". Roland

Here is how Bar Tarnovski - Dror Padon from Israel bid 7♦: 1♦ - 1♠ 2♥ - 2♠*) 3N - 4♦ 4♥ - 4N 5♠ - 5N 6♣ - 6♦ 7♦ - p *) Forcing 1444 hands are difficult to bid accurately, so Padon obviously thought that Tarnovski was 4-5 in the reds. 5NT was a grand slam try, guaranteeing all key cards and ♦Q. The 6♣ response was not enough, and Padon signed off. Tarnovski tanked for a while before he raised. After all, he had considerable extras and should perhaps have jumped to 7 over 5NT already. He got a trump lead, won the ace and cashed another round of trump. Then a heart to the king and another one back to the ace. He then cashed ♠K before ruffing a heart. As it was, he could not go down no matter which line he took. By the way, I just looked it up. West did not have ♥9. He had AQ7x. East had K9. Frances rotated the deal to begin with (it was a NS hand), but that is insignificant. Roland

You noticed Mixed Scandinavian, but you did not notice Hebrew over the weekend. We had Israeli commentators, yes, but no Hebrew commentary. We actually never had Hebrew commentary, and I am pretty sure that our software doesn't support Hebrew yet. We need someone to write a programme first, because it's a different alphabet. Maybe Migry Zur Campanile, Michael Barel or Ilan Shezifi (the latter is a computer freak and organises our broadcasts from Israel). As to your comment on multiple languages at one table, Fred and I have agreed that it should be avoided for one obvious reason: The commentators must be able to understand each other. It's not enough that, say, the Polish commentator understands English, the English speaking commentator must also understand Polish. Example: The Polish commentator makes a point in Polish. Other commentators may not agree and may want to tell the audience why they don't. The problem is that they don't get the chance, because they don't understand what the Polish commentator said. Besides, my personal opinion is that more than one language at one table will create chaos and nothing the majority of our spectators would appreciate. Roland

Yes, if he has the 7. Then you can exit with ♣3, or a spade for that matter. If you did that at the table and it worked, I congratulate you. But if he really had 87x, he probably ruined it all by tossing the 8 at trick 1 and the 7 when declarer exited with a club to you. And even worse: If partner had say 863, he gave the contract at trick 1 when he followed with the 8. Get a new partner! Roland

Sorry Marlowe, but this auction has nothing to do with New Minor Forcing. That convention relates to an auction where opener rebids 1NT. Example: 1♦ - 1♠ 1N - 2♣ You can read about NMF by clicking on: http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/NewMinorForcing.html .... 1♣ - 1♠ 2♣ - 2♦ True, 2♦ is forcing (as is any new suit by responder), but it is not the NMF convention. A rather common misunderstanding unfortunately. Roland

Stepping stone squeeze must be a typo, Dwayne. It's an endplay squeeze where a defender serves as a stepping stone in order to reach a stranded winner. We do not want to endplay anyone in a grand slam :) Roland

I agree with all you are saying, coyot. I was just hoping that all users from English speaking countries and people from elsewhere, who speak and understand English well or adequately, would care to say something like: Single-table coverage: English. Two-table coverage: English + another language if needed and practically possible. Roland

7NT is better than the simple line you point out. ♥J10 or J10x in either hand will also give you 13 tricks if spades don't behave. Then you don't even need the club finesse. 7NT is clearly better than 7♦. Ruffing a heart is dangerous every time one defender has a doubleton. Then you will have to rely on diamonds to be 3-3, because you must ruff with the ace. Roland

Well, I had a vain but apparently naive hope that even all people from English speaking countries would understand that not everyone on this planet speaks English. So why not give them commentary in their mother tongue when possible? Rest assured, English will always be one of the languages we offer. Roland