Walddk

The internet connection from China was a little shaky 3-4 years ago, but that has changed. Over the past 2 years we have had several broadcasts from various parts of the country, and only rarely did we encounter significant problems. I am quite hopeful that the connectivity from Shanghai will be stable. The Chinese are very competent organisers, so I am convinced that they have tested what they need to test well in advance. Roland

Only 4 days to go. Exciting, is it not? Although most of us are unable to be at the venue, we will get a great vantage point in the BBO vugraph theatre. Kick off Sunday in most places, Saturday for some: Sunday 11:00 Shanghai Sunday 05:00 Paris Sunday 04:00 London Sunday 13:00 Sydney Saturday 23:00 New York Saturday 20:00 Los Angeles For full schedule, please go to http://online.bridgebase.com/vugraph/sched...?order_by=event Lots of interesting matches in Round 1 (Bermuda Bowl). How about ... USA1 v USA2 China SMEG v Argentina Norway v Sweden Ireland v Netherlands India v Italy Australia v Pakistan Not that it will help a lot, but feel free to take your picks. If everything goes according to plan we will be broadcasting from three matches in each of the 21 qualifying rounds, and some of them will no doubt involve teams in the Venice Cup and Seniors Bowl too. I would be very surprised if two of the three matches in Round 1 do not turn out to be the all American clash and the home team against Argentina. Some teams have already arrived in Shanghai, but the majority will arrive Thursday/Friday. As we all well know, it takes time to acclimatise (jet-lag). Anna Gudge from England (the lady behind EcatsBridge) is already there, and she has posted a blog ... http://ecatsbridge.blogspot.com/ Chapter 1 today; interesting reading. Bookmark it! Roland

[hv=d=w&v=n&n=s654hk7dakq83c1053&w=s10982hj4d1074ckj92&e=sjha102dj965caq764&s=sakq73hq98653d2c8]399|300|Scoring: XIMP[/hv] Here is the whole hand. Frances tanked for at least 2 minutes before she bid 4♠, and her partner took even longer before he pulled to 5♥. Down 1. Yes, I know the hand, but even if I had not, I claim that double is superior. That would also lead us to the best contract, whether opener takes out into 4♦ or 4♥. If he bids 4♦, you pull to 4♥. 10 tricks. North should perhaps have passed 4♠ which also makes with careful play. My guess is that he feared Frances had 4-6 in the majors. Roland

As no B/I player has contributed yet, please allow me to offer a little help. Partner's ♦9 is likely from 9x when declarer followed with the 8, although a singleton is possible if he falsecarded from KQ8x. If you duck, you know that you can give partner a ruff soon because you will get in with ♣A. But is soon also soon enough? Is it perhaps dangerous to let declarer get access to dummy? Take it from there. Enough for now. Hmmm, I thought I saw the 8 from declarer earlier today. Did Frances change it or am I totally out of my mind?? Roland

Tak allesammen! Thanks everyone :)

While I agree with 2♥ (I am a strong believer in bidding your longer suit first), I must disagree with the vast majority regarding responder's rebid. I would double because I don't want to bypass 4♥. Double is take-out. It doesn't promise four spades. What else can I do with say 3532 shape and a good hand? My plan if I get a second chance is to pull 4♦ to 4♥, and then I must have revealed my lengths in the majors: 46 or 56. What if partner passes 4♣ you may argue. If he does, it rates to be best for our side. I don't mind defending with a singleton diamond and ♠AKQ. I'll go as far as saying that in my view 4♠ is wrong because it forces partner to the 5-level with 2-2 in the majors, perhaps even with 3-2. Roland

I know he didn't. But if he did, that would be negative? Card showing I presume, with less than three hearts. Better ask Frances. Roland

Sure opener's pass is non-forcing. Your 2♥ was merely forcing for one round. I don't think anyone plays 2♥ as game forcing after an overcall. Roland

Partner did not double 4♣. I wrote 4♣ to your left, pass to you. Roland

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=sakq73hq98653d2c8]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] A rather rare occasion. You hold both majors, and yet the opponents manage to pre-empt you at a high level. You are South (as was a frequent forum poster) with West as dealer. LHO passes, your partner opens 1♦, RHO overcalls 2♣ and you bid 2♥ (forcing). 4♣ to your left, pass to you. - 1. Do you agree with 2♥? - 2. Doesn't matter, 2♥ is your call. What do you bid now? Roland

I overcall 1NT. It's not too good; it shows roughly 15-18 and you have the worst shape possible. Finally, your partner is a passed hand and LHO has not spoken yet. 1NT seems just right. Roland

So why is my vote for 3NT a lone voice in the wilderness? If partner has a broken suit, we can make 3NT easily while 4♥ may or may not have trouble. Am I supposed to be terrified of spades? There's only 8 points available in the minors, so if partner has a broken suit he won't be without spade honors. I see good arguments for 4♣. I just don't see what the point is of 4♥. 3NT is lower, it may be the right place to play, and IMHO shows my hand better than a 4♥ call does. Partner can always put it in 4♥ if he wants. Why would he pull 3NT with ♠ Jx ♥ AKJ10xx ♦ Kx ♣ KQx He shouldn't be concerned about a (lacking) spade stopper. I would not pull 3NT with that hand. Responder knows what he is doing when he suggests notrumps I hope. I bid my hand (I did already) and let him bid his. Bidding 4♥ now is the same as saying that you don't trust his judgement. Roland

Those who claim that 3♥ sets the suit seem to forget that 2♦ was not game forcing. 3♥ establishes a game force, but it does not guarantee a solid or semi-solid suit. If the system had been 2/1 I would agree that hearts are trumps, asking for a cue bid. Even now 4♣ would be a cue bid in my book. Opener has a one-suiter (no other suit with four cards). I just don't think responder's hand is good enough for a cue bid. There is usually at least one flaw if we were to arrive in 6♥. Roland

Stamina is indeed an important factor in a long event like the World Championships. However, at no point will they be playing more than three stanzas of 16 boards per day. Considering that all teams have three pairs, this means that no pair is going to play more than 32 boards a day. This is hardly much of a challenge at this level. For 14 of the 22 teams in each series the championships are virtually over after 7 days of play. The pairs on those teams will likely take part in the Transnational Teams after they are eliminated. Roland

I would just raise to 4♥. It would have been tougher with stronger holdings in the minors. Slam seems far away opposite an average jump rebid. Roland

>>Rant<< The real problem is that most intermediates don't know when a double is for penalties and when it's for take-out. It's a difficult area even for more advanced players. Experts in regular partnerships have clear agreements. For years I have encouraged intermediate players to focus on the basics, and yet we see that all they (the majority sadly) are interested in is to add convention upon convention, crying for more space in their profiles. They would be better off if they play nothing but Stayman and Blackwood. If you are determined and have flair, you will get far if the basics are routine stuff. Forget about fancy conventions. Either you forget them, use them when you should not, and don't use them when you should. >>Rant over<< Roland

Yeah. Just thought it an interesting hand. It felt a bit like 2♣ was a psych. It certainly doesn't have the high cards normally promised for a 2/1. Who cares about high cards? You make slam 78% of the time opposite as little as ♠ Kxxxxx ♥ Axxx ♦ xx ♣ A The only problem with responding 2♣ followed by spade support is that opener may not show ♠Q to a keycard ask (5♦ = 3) and 5♥ "do you have trump queen?", simply because he can't be certain that responder has four spades. Give opener one spade less and you do not want to bid slam. 1♠ - 2♣ 2♥ - 3♠ 4♣ - 4NT 5♦ - 5♥ ?? Opener will now deny ♠Q whether he has five or six spades, unless 3♠ is agreed as four, 2♠ as three. I doubt that many have that agreement. 2♣ with the example hand is just common sense. If anyone thinks he/she doesn't have a game force opposite 1♠, his/her judgement can only be described as poor. There is no guarantee that even 4♠ will make, but you can't stay out of game with that hand. Roland

He can't have those cards, Han. He bypassed 3NT (serious). The 5-level is not necessarily safe. If a hand with three keycards and trump queen isn't seriously interested in slam, he or she will have to judge better next time. Roland

I had enough. Three keycards and trump queen needed for slam to be worth bidding. He would surely have bid 3NT with that. Roland

It's a close call in my view. Do you want to force to game or not? The heart suit is not exactly great, but it's likely the last chance to get hearts in if we have a 5-3 fit. Being non-vulnerable at IMPs I think I will settle for 1NT. Maybe I can catch up later if partner's rebid requires action. The only rebid I will pass is 2♠, and then I am quite happy that I did not force to game. I am sure partner can have hands where game is a fair shot even if he rebids his spades, but I am not too worried. Vulnerable I would have gone for 2♥. This is how close it is as far as I am concerned. Roland

Obvious raise for me. If partner is not void in diamonds and if he doesn't have a running club suit, he is not close to having a jump to 6♥ with four baby hearts and no ♠A. Sure there is a remote risk that RHO can double for the lead (club void). However, if that is the case, LHO can double 7♣ because RHO must be 4360 for his double of 7♥. I am prepared to run the slight risk. Roland

Feel free to play your version of bridge, but if you play the real game, it makes absolutely no sense to tell your partner that you have a limit raise; then moments later you change your mind and bid on after he signs off. Apparently you think it's a game forcing hand after all (you intend to bid on), so why start by showing it as limit? Find a game forcing bid with support for spades, or bid 2♣ whether it's game forcing or not. Roland

A limit raise? Sorry, but I think it's poor judgement if you think 3♠ is the right spot should partner sign off. 2♣, 2NT and a red splinter are all reasonable. Some must support when they have four; my view is that 2♣ is the best description before I support spades. Finally, I am not concerned about what LHO does regarding the red suits. I have nothing to be ashamed of when I bid 4♠ over his 4red. Roland

Among experts I would think double stands out a mile. I am not so sure I would risk that playing with an "unkown intermediate". I think I would overbid a little with 3♠. And no, this is not a 1NT opening because you don't have a rebid problem if RHO passes. Roland

A tournament director is not supposed to judge anything. If he/she is interested in judgement, he/she will confer with expert players around the room. The TD is supposed to determine whether a law has been violated. Certified directors are quite capable as far as the laws are concerned, but they are not necessarily good bridge players. If I decide open 2♣ on ♠ x ♥ xx ♦ KQJ10xxxx ♣ AK I would certainly not want any TD to tell me that this is not a 2♣ opening. Frankly speaking, it is none of his/her business. Roland