chasetb

After discounting my Q♦ and subtracting 2 from my A♦, I have 11. I would like to sign off, but since I still have an opener by any standards and a Max 1♦ hand in Precision at the start, I go Last Train. 5♦ is bonkers, I would expect a FAR better suit for that.

I know I am flying solo, but I am only bidding 3♥. I am afraid of forcing 4♠ if I go all in with 4♥, and while I do have 8 trump, I am missing both the Ace and King. On a side note, I (as a 26 year old) also play 5M openings as Grand Slam Force, but only one person I play with would possibly recognize it.

7♦ is an excellent contract. Not only is it cold on any 3-2 break, it also works on any 4-1 break when Hearts break 3-1 or 2-2, all you need to do is ruff a Spade. I would always expect 5+ Diamonds on the auction 1♥-2♦ . I know that a lot of people don't like 1NT forcing, but it works like a charm on this hand. The only bid I don't really like is 5NT, it's a little aggressive.

I feel I have to slightly clarify my remark. When I made it, I was talking about individuals, and I stand by that remark. When I say World Class, I mean the top 20-25 players in the world. I am not saying that women can't crack that, but because of nature (and currently women's events) there will inevitably be more men. There are a bunch of experts that happen to be women, and quite a few make the top 100. However, bridge is NOT AN INDIVIDUAL GAME! The best players don't always win, the best partnerships do consistently, and occasionally other good pairs/teams in luck. Sabine may not be World Class by my book, but not only is she no doubt in the top 50, she makes an excellent partner, so the sum is more than the parts. The Gartaganis' aren't WC either, but being very good players, a husband and wife that probably get along great at the bridge table, and knowing their system pat makes them far more formidable than at first glance. I am glad that Canada placed top 8 and would root for them, but USA 1 is my team and my pick, so good luck mates. **How about the fact that the teams that finished 1-4 in the Round Robin in the open ALL had negative carryovers going into the Quarter Finals?

I have heard from 2 top USA Experts, who prefer to stay off the record, that it is because of not being aggressive enough. Players like Auken, Jenny Wolpert, Pamela Granovetter are very good players, but because of being women and that game, they can't hang with the men at a WC level because they lack that killer instinct, that putting the foot on the opponents' neck and applying pressure when they are down. Men in general are better at focusing on one detail over women, that is mostly genetics.

At what vulnerabilities would you bid 4♠ on this auction? I posted it as all Red, but I want to know about all 4. [hv=pc=n&n=s9876532h7dq7c862&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1hp2hp3s(16+%20HCP%2C%200-1%20%21S)p4h]133|200[/hv] Same question, but what about this auction? [hv=pc=n&n=s9876532h7dq7c862&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1hp2hp4hpp]133|200[/hv] For those who care, this was with GIB Basic bots, and here is the hand.

Some 'surprises' so far: 1.) Japan currently sit in 3rd, 3.05 VPs behind leaders Poland. However, of the 7 teams they have faced, only Germany and Canada are any good; they lost and won respectively, and they lost to Bahrain. Japan isn't a bad team, but they aren't top-flight either and I expect them to finish somewhere between 12th - 14th. 2.) USA 2 currently sit in 19th, but they haven't faced a bad team yet - USA 1 and China are the 'worst teams' so far. Their next 2 matches today and the first match tomorrow should be cakewalks, how they 'fair' will let us know if they can compete for a QF spot (pun intended). 3.) Canada is currently in 6th, and their results are a bit odd. Lost to Japan and badly to England, but beat up on Poland and the Netherlands. Their next two matches (against Italy and China) will also let us know how 'for real' they are. I have them just missing out, but if they show up and gain at least 20 VPs, then I will slot them in for a QF spot.

What else isn't sensible is this definition of 3NT, as seen here. Really? 5- ♠, so that 3NT is not playable?

I don't know what Bergen's rules are, but I know the Rule of 26 would work well for Beginners and Intermediates. EDIT - I read Zel's post a little closer, and see that he covered shortness; the link therefore lends credibility. I would personally add to it that an Ace in the splintered suit should count for 2 rather than nothing, but that's just me.

This one escapes any logic. Here is the play at my table, basic robots and dial-up - http://tinyurl.com/kgx78lg Here's the same bloody hand, thrice - http://tinyurl.com/lnzee2s / http://tinyurl.com/lxsa78e / http://tinyurl.com/k4qs2lj Skip to a different hand. First off, my description should be only 5+ ♠, and second, why is GIB jumping to 4 when it doesn't have a hand worth it?

Let's say you are playing a method (whether Spiral Scan or DCB or something similar), and you have a mess-up in that you denied a specific card you have. Earlier today, I had shown 8-11 HCP, 4243 shape, the A♦, but denied the K♠ (I thought I had denied the K♦ when I bid, but realized my mess up a few seconds later, right before partner explained it to opps). My only top honors were A♦, K♠, Q♥ How would you recover, not being able to show/fabricate any Jacks? I'll post the hand here in 2-3 days. Thanks to everyone who votes or posts, and doubly for anyone who votes, and posts their reasoning why!

It's a good idea, but I wonder about the algorithms. For example, they gave me this hand. I don't know anyone who would ever be in 6NT; 6♣, on the other hand, is feasible until you see that ghastly 5-0 break. Also, I know this isn't probably aimed at me, but I can't take it seriously when I go down 2, and it says "Almost made it!". -2 is not almost, and it gives a false sense of accomplishment, especially when you misplay it. EDIT - link doesn't seem to work, so here they are: [hv=pc=n&s=sjt7hak8dk4cak965&w=sq84hqjt762dqj85c&n=sa963h54dat76cq72&e=sk52h93d932cjt843]399|300[/hv]

Since it sounds like you don't play Short Suit Game tries (assuming no splinters, but might be wrong), I will just blast 4♥. I will concede that partner could have a great fitting hand for us, but I'm willing to give that up for hands where the points don't mesh well, but we make it because of no information leakage.

To stay with the field, 4♠ is a must, since 3.5♠ does not exist. More and more however, this hand is screaming 3NT to me. 4333 hands are very poor offensively, and I have a bad feeling in 4♠ it will go ♦x to the Ace, King, ruff, and ♣A for -1.

On this hand, why can't I stop in 4 of a minor, especially once partner has limited his hand? Maybe we don't have any game, and I want to stop. I recommend that 3m followed by 4m is to play when the 2♠ bidder is limited to less than 13.

Talk about two more stinkers. On this hand, NOT A SINGLE NORTH GIB (9) made a move over the 2♠ (0-9 HCP, 4+ Spades) bid, despite a great 19 that I count up as pretty much game. 3 West GIBs didn't open 2♦ (???), and the other 3 Souths passed (???) the Double. [hv=pc=n&s=skt842h96dt4ckj76&w=sj6hq42daq7632c32&n=saq97hakjtdk98cq5&e=s53h8753dj5cat984&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=2ddp2sppp]399|300[/hv]

Yes - look at the 4th listing on the table. North was in 5♣, yet the lead was the 4♣. The lead is clearly wrong, but declarer could easily also be wrong, since East doesn't have a single 4 in his hand. Maybe the ♣3 was led.

[hv=pc=n&s=sj6543hat9daj3ck9&w=s98hj542dq962cj64&n=skq72h873dt7c8732&e=sathkq6dk854caqt5&d=s&v=b&b=7&a=1sp2sdp3h3s4sppp]399|300[/hv] Of the first 6 times this board was played, 5 imitated this auction, four were -5 and 1 was -4. Two others got way too high, in 4♥ and 5♥.

1.) OP said they were playing a 12-14 1NT, so the HCP count is 25-27 HCP, not 29+ . 2.) In MY post, I said we were using a 15-17 1NT, but I only had 11 HCP, and partner had 16 to bring us to 27 combined HCP. And like I said, 3NT was -1 while 4♠ was +1 on a 5-4 fit. 3.) I love me some simulations, but please re-do it, and list the exact details that you used, since there are a few others on here who will run them as well.

2 weeks ago at the local club, I had almost the exact same hand as OP. We were playing 15-17 NT, so just take away both Jacks and give the ♣10 and ♥3. I directly bid 3NT, only to find out to my horror that 3NT only had 8 tricks and 4♠ had 11, partner in fact had ♠Jxxx. If you want to play with the room, transfer and then bid 3NT; if you want to make sure you don't completely blow the hand, use Stayman and then bid 3NT if partner doesn't show 4+ card support. Personally, my experience says that the suit is so good, we only want to play 4♠ if it is a 9 or 10-card fit. Do not forget, 9 tricks is one less than 10.

A great example of a mish-mash would be the CC that 32519 posted - they have a strong 2♣, a forcing but not necessarily strong 1♣ and a limited (but not sure how limited, could a 25+ HCP 4414 bid it?) 1♦. I think I would classify it as Swedish-like as per their CC.

Yes we have 6 Spades, but because they are headed by the AJ, we need to show the Spades first, then support partner's Hearts. A rare case where the FSJ by an unpassed hand pays dividends.

Because we're in the passout seat, maybe 2NT would be better off being a 2-suited hand rather than 15-17 balanced with Spade stoppers. Not saying that it is the optimal way to play it, but it would be nice to have someone do some simulations to find out.

People who treat their pets better than other people, people who give their pets either unimaginative or crazy names, and the bitch next door who barks her head off at me and acts threatening when I am outside, but when I have to go over runs away, and CONTINUES to bark at me.

1.) Not that anyone would think that Fred was lying, but I was able to talk to Joe Grue for 5 minutes in Philadelphia, and when I asked him what he and Brad Moss was playing, he said "We are playing 2/1 when Vul and Precision when NV. It was a compromise, because I think that Precision is the best thing ever, he thinks that 2/1 is the best thing ever. We are playing a simplified version of each." 2.) Interesting that Krzysztof Martens' book would say that (On Baron Barclay, it's called Marten's System), because in the 2011 Bermuda Bowl he and Jassem played Polish Club when Vulnerable, and Strong Club (15+ bal, 17+ others) and 12-14 NT when NV. They killed it in qualifying. It would be interesting to play a 2-system card, it is GCC-legal in the ACBL but you must Pre-Alert it.