Walddk

Why must this develop into a personal attack? I simply don't understand. Richard, you used "civil" yourself, so why don't you keep it "civil"? Roland

I don't know if there is a common defence. My guess is that there are many different defences. One way of doing it is: 1♣ (2♣) ? Dbl = Card showing, usually interested in penalising at least one of the majors. 2♦ = Natural, forcing. 2♥ = Stopper in hearts, not in spades, at least invitational. 2♠ = Stopper in spades, not in hearts, at least invitational. 2N = Natural, both majors stopped. No wish to penalise opps at the 2-level. 3♣ = Natural, NF. 3♦ = Splinter for clubs. 3M = Splinter for clubs. 3N = Natural, both majors stopped. ..... 1♦ (2♦) ? Dbl = Card showing, usually interested in penalising at least one of the majors. 2♥ = Stopper in hearts, not in spades, at least invitational. 2♠ = Stopper in spades, not in hearts, at least invitational. 2N = Natural, both majors stopped. No wish to penalise opps at the 2-level. 3♣ = Natural, forcing. 3♦ = Natural, NF. 3M = Splinter for diamonds. 3N = Natural, both majors stopped. ..... 1♥ (2♥) ? P = No bid, or a penalty of 2♠ (maybe also RHO's minor). Dbl = Constructive heart raise to the 2-level. 2♠ = Constructive heart raise to the 3-level. 2N = GF with heart support. 3m = Natural, forcing. 3♥ = Pre-emptive. 3♠ = Splinter for hearts. 3N = Natural, usually no heart fit. ..... 1♠ (2♠) ? P = No bid, or penalty of 3♥ (maybe also RHO's minor). Dbl = Constructive spade raise to the 2-level. 2N = GF with spade support. 3m = Natural, forcing. 3♥ = Constructive spade raise to the 3-level. 3♠ = Pre-emptive. 3N = Natural, usually no spade fit. ..... Too much to remember? Perhaps, but you have most of the hands covered here. Roland

I agree with all MikeH is saying and would like to add: 1. I am truly impressed that Ben is able to remember all this, along with all his special gadgets (I am sure they are fine). 2. Since many top class players have a memory as good as Ben's, it strikes me as odd that you don't see any (or at least very few) who actually use ZAR-points as their guidelines. Why is that? Haven't they seen the light? Roland

Italian cues ahve the advantage that it is always clear partner can keep them from cashing two tricks in the cue-bid suit. Not the whole truth. If the control is the king and it's exposed in dummy, they may be able to cash the first two (or more) tricks. Roland

In another thread I warned against opening balanced 11 counts (unless you play 10-12 or 11-13 NT). This is a perfect example of why it's ill-advised to open such a heap of rubbish. You don't have just ONE certain trick. If you force me to open, and that's the idea I suppose, I refuse to make any kind of noise thereafter unless asked to. So even if I play support doubles, I do not double now. Roland

Any details on vugraph coverage in Bangkok yet? On a positive note, we have received a letter from the Director of Operations for the World Youth Team Championships, and that's a good sign. Last week I forwarded the letter to our contacts in Thailand and I now assume that they will take it from there. However, it is unlikely to be "comprehensive coverage" unless the local organisers can find plenty of volunteer operators. What we are guaranteed is a broadcast from one match in every round, e.g. the official vugraph match in Bangkok. Roland

I don't have a problem with 4-3 fits at the 2 and 3-level, but I also know that many dislike it. As to your example hand: sure, notrump plays better, but you know as well as I that you can create hands that work better for whichever method you prefer. Jxxx Ax Qxxx Axx Now you want to play in spades all of a sudden. As I said in my first post, the actual opening hand is a little too good for 2♠. It qualifies for 3♠ in my book, and accordingly it's not at all obvious that you want to invite opposite a minimum - especially not non vulnerable. Roland

Hi Nick. Welcome to the forums! 1) No, but some TDs ban psyches and they are entitled to do that. 2) Yes, to a certain extent. I think it's ok to ban psyches in tourneys for beginners and intermediates. 3) Yes to both. A weak 2 with only 4 cards is a significant distortion. It's also a poor bid. 4) No. If the tournament rules didn't specify that psyches were disallowed, no-one has been damaged and the table result should stand. Roland

Why two balanced hands? There is a valid reason if opener decides to raise with only 3 cards. The most likely pattern is 5431, and then the 4-3 fit often plays better than notrump. Most 5332 hands will rebid 1NT and then responder can check back from there. Playing the relay (2♠ after a heart raise), responder kan find out about shortage if opener shows 3-card support and minimum. The important thing to remember is that you don't open balanced 11 counts and you don't invite with thrash. Roland

Gazzilli is the answer: 1♠ - 1NT 2♣ - 2♦ 3♥ - 3NT 2♣ = Natural, or any 16+ hand. 2♦ = 7-11 hcp. 3♥ = 17+, 5-4 in the majors. Roland

The Garozzo 2NT relay will take care of that hand too: 1♥ - 1♠ 2♠ - 2NT 3♦* * 3-card support, minimum. South has heard enough and will sign off in 4♠. Roland

The Garozzo relay should do the trick. 1♥ - 1♠ 2♠ - 2NT 3♣ - 3♦ 3♥ - 3♠ 4♦ - 4NT 5♥ - 6♠ p 2N = Relay, tell me more. At least invitational. 3♣ = 4-card support, unspecified singleton. A maximum per definition. 3♦ = Where is your singleton? 3♥ = Clubs. 3♠ = Slam interest. 4♦ = Cue bid (honour). 4N = RKCB 5♥ = 2 key cards, no spade queen. You will likely also get to the slam if opener rebids 3♠. Personally, I think the hand is good enough for that. Roland

Yes, East should pass 4♠. The 2♥ reverse already showed a strong hand, and West knows that. Not sure what 5♠ is (did West perhaps think that 4NT was to play?). Even 4♠ is in jeopardy (possible diamond ruff), but it's a perfectly normal game. Roland

We have now listed the time schedule for the European Team Championships in Warsaw, Poland, from August 13-26. http://online.bridgebase.com/vugraph/sched...?order_by=event Team lists for the Open and Women are now available at http://www.ecatsbridge.com/Events/ebl/warsaw06/default.asp It's with great pleasure I can announce that we will be broadcasting from at least 6 (often 8) tables in every round. We will be covering Italy, France and Poland throughout (6 tables), and when they are not featured as one of the teams on the official vugraph at the venue, we are going to add that match (+2 tables). When one or more of the three countries mentioned above have "less important matches" in the open series, we will be showing the women or seniors instead. It's also our plan to offer commentary in English, French, Italian and Polish. This will be our most comprehensive coverage of any major championship so far. I am sure our many viewers are as delighted as we are. Roland

I wouldn't say 3NT is perfect when you have a void, but it's definitely acceptable. Anyway, now you have told your story, and the rest is up to partner. If he wanted to play game, he would have bid 5♣ (pass or correct if you have diamonds), not 4♣. Making 5♣ takes a lot of help from the defence. Heart lead ducked and heart continuation. Much to ask for, especially looking at West's hand with two KQ combinations. Roland

Lack of judgement and evaluation of a hand. 1. Qxx Axx Axxx xxx The actual hand: 10 hcp, 9 losers. ..... 2. xxx A Kxxxx xxxx A different hand: 7 hcp, 8 losers. I think we agree that 2. is not an invitational hand, but perhaps a constructive 2♠ raise. If we agree, how can 1. be invitational? Roland

Bid a confident 2♠ and smile :P Roland

Your partner put it very well. The Italian school of cue-bidding. Roland

It's a delicate issue in many places around the world, and I know several commentators who decline to commentate on events where "friends" are on vugraph. The federations didn't bar them; their own decisions entirely. BBO will obviously respect either, but it's a shame that we can't have local commentators (English in this case) who are familiar with the players and their systems. Roland

I disagree. 2♠ shows a hand that was too good to raise to 4♠. Mild slam try, whereas 3♠ would show a strong slam try. Roland

I can't tell you what's right or wrong, because all the problems are from a bidding contest. However, all hands are from real life (presumably from Scotland since it's the SBU Magazine). Frances and I are on the same wavelength on many hands, and I was particularly happy to see her repeated 4th suit on hand 5.. Here is what I sent to the moderator: 1. 2♣. We don't know whose hand it is, and mine is way too good for a diamond pre-empt. In fact, partner should have a good hand, because 1♦ doesn't take any room away. His diamond suit isn't great, so he must have excellent values outside. I am reluctant to reveal that a 1♠ psych crossed my mind for a brief second. 2. 3NT. Tough one. Pass and 4♣ (majors) are other options, and all have upsides and downsides. Majors are likely to split badly, AK in clubs not ideal for 3NT, and pass could easily be the biggest loser because it may make! 3♣ vulnerable without the two top honours; perhaps he is 7-5 or 7-4 in the minors. I considered 4♣ because of ♥109. 3. 4♠. Finally a hand that is perfectly suited for this bid. Many may miss the point, but 4♠ actually shows support for clubs! Why is that? Because 3♠ is forcing after 2-o-1 (remember that 2♣ was just a 1-round force). Therefore, 4♠ can only have one meaning: solid or semi-solid spade suit with club support. If responder can't move over 4♠, we are unlikely to have missed a slam. 4. 3♠. I don't have a problem with splintering in a 4-card major system when partner has at least 4 cards. Good hand, but not game forcing. I am entitled to pass 4♣ in my methods. If this is true or not in the system we use in that bidding contest I can't tell. In a 5-card major system I would bid 2♠. 5. 3♣. Repeated 4th suit seems best with this hand. It keeps all options open, including 3NT if partner has 3 small. This is the only way we can get to perhaps the only making game. It also gives partner the chance to bid 3♥ with Ax. Diamonds can wait if we belong there. We don't if he is 4-1-5-3 with nothing in clubs. 6. 3♥. The most difficult problem of the set. Non-vulnerable I would have passed, but I don't like to miss a vulnerable game at IMPs. The problem is that we don't know what his 3♦ rebid is based on. Heart values or 3-card spade support? By bidding 3♥ we can find out if he has the latter. It would look plain silly to bid 3NT opposite AQx x AKQxxx xxx. 7. 1♠. I see no reason to upgrade this hand to 2♣, or 2NT for that matter. Do we miss a game if I open 1♠? Rarely, and I am prepared to run that risk. Sometimes you have maximum for your bid and not the usual 9 or 10 counts people (me too) open these days. 8. ♦J. I don't know if dummy has promised a major or not, but I will still refrain from leading the (I guess) popular ♠2. The opponents have limited values; let them do the hard work themselves. There are 3 holdings I try to avoid leading from if I have a sound alternative: Jxxx, Axxx, A10xx. Too often did I experience that this cost a vital trick. At least ♦J doesn't give declarer anything he couldn't have done himself, but we may of course lose a tempo. Roland

Must be the heat Phil (it's 30C where I am, don't know about your place). We will all make it if you duck at trick 1. Roland

I don't know if the F and I-words are better or worse than the A-word, but you should obviously not have responded the way you did. I understand your frustration, but the best thing you can do is to ignore it and send a report to abuse@ as soon as possible. Roland

I assume that North continued diamonds. There is no endplay unless he switches to a low spade. 1. ♦J to the king. 2. Diamond return (or trump switch). You win, draw trumps and at some point you take the spade finesse. It loses and North exits with a spade. The defence must now come to two club tricks. It doesn't matter if you cash the last diamond or not before the spade finesse. And even if you knew the layout, it wouldn't help to cash ♠A and play another. North wins his king and gets out with his last spade. Roland

Please don't present a play problem without giving us the lead. Roland