Cave_Draco

Dragon view... 2m is rarely good at MP, 1NT is often good! At MP, 2m is almost forcing, :huh: At IMPs... who cares?

Put simply... 1m-2m is constructive; 1m-3m is pre-emptive, :D There are problems with "short Club" but, mostly, "short Club" is a 4-card suit. The 4-card major question only occurs with 5-card majors!, play Benj Acol and "Lo & behold!" Dragon Rule #9: Never jump without a good reason. Playing IMs, you jump to show weakness!

ISP number is meaningless, :lol: IP address is not, but my IP address is mutable (Dial-up gives a different IP address every time), This IP address will self-destruct in 2hrs.... BBO doesn't care where the login comes from, I could visit you, use your comp & login as me, NP. Deleting historical IDs? Yahoo is, reportedly, getting round to it! Not because of lack of space but to unblock nice IDs... If sinus_iridum becomes free...

Agreed, :lol: . However, this is B&I string! I am blessed with an Intermediate partner who is a Friend. We do argue but friends can, :) I was just struck by the absence of the word "Partner"; I tried to correct an imbalance.

4th highest from KJxx stands out as a bad lead, :lol: Presumably East discarded a ♠ on dummy's ♦s! That gives 5 ♦, 4 ♠, 2 ♥ and 1 ♣ I don't see #13... Perhaps the main BIL lesson on this hand is the importance of communication in defence? What should the defence discard on the 4th ♦? A ♥ from East, a ♠ from West? What should be discarded on the 5th ♦?

♥J I "know" partner has a 5-card ♥ suit! On this hand I will get one chance to lead; I need to find partner's suit. IMPs scoring, I'm not bothered about the overtrick. However, it is difficult to construct a hand that partner can have where we can defeat the contract without taking ♥ tricks. A priori: :lol: Declarer - 4-3-3-3 - s/he declined 4♠ Dummy - 4-4-3-2 or 4-4-2-3 Partner - 3-5-3-2 or 3-5-4-1 A ♣ lead is futile; ♠s are behaving well - for declarer; a ♦ may well kill partner's entry!

1NT-3NT North isn't good enough for a slam try, close but no cigar, :blink:

I like the Weak NT, but not on this hand, :blink: Wide open in one suit is fine, wide open in two needs something extra! To open 1NT is to value the ♥J way too much, it's worth no more than a 10. Valuing it as a 10, I have 11hcp and 2 10s... With compensation e.g. a 5-card suit; good body... I might still consider 1NT, South's hand has nothing extra.

[hv=d=e&n=skq87hq4dkqt62c75&w=s93ht875dj84ck986&e=sj6542hkj2d753cqj&s=satha963da9cat432]399|300|[/hv] I think that's right, :blink: 2-4-2-5 is not a good shape for 1NT. 4333, 4432 or 5332(5-card minor) are, IMO, fairly standard. A better sequence, I am not saying the best, is: 1C-1D-1H-3NT

One word that seems notable by its absence... "Partner"! S/he is the chap sat opposite, as opposed to the opposition who are sat beside you, :blink: Lying can lead to loss of partnership trust. Admittedly, some hands don't lend themselves to an honest bid but, if you hold a post-mortem... 1) Will partner sympathise with your problem? 2) Will partner understand your solution? 3) Will partner "forgive" your lie? If the answer to all three is "No" then you had better hope that partner is a Friend.

Balancing used to be, in the UK, known as "Protecting". In the balancing position, ask yourself "Why did P pass?" It could be that P didn't have a bid... 1♥-I have AQxx-Kxx-KJxx-Kx, I would pass; knowing that partner will "protect" my pass if s/he has even a moderate hand.

I think this is out and out gamesmanship. Calling the director for a psyche is not reasonable unless you think that there has also been an infraction. I don't see how it can be considered gamesmanship, :D http://www.worldbridge.org/departments/systems/psyches.asp Given that one often only plays a couple of boards against any particular opponents, how can one judge if the WBF guidlines are being broken? I would maintain that no pair can so judge, unless opps psyche twice, :lol: If the final sentence was amended to "Calling the director for a psyche is not reasonable unless you think that there could have been an infraction." I would agree. However, failing to call the director is, IMO, to make the unilateral decision that no infraction has taken place! I say that making that decision is not "proper", it is up to the director to decide. How can the director decide if s/he is denied information?

"Shooting" - The art of playing for an abnormal result - is perfectly legal and proper. A private agreement to fail to adhere to your Convention Card is most definately NOT. P.S. Psyching is not the way to shoot effectively! Unless the rules have changed drastically since I played Tournament bridge... Every time your opponents psyche, call the director, :lol: You will get penalised by losing time! But, a psyching pair will lose time every round, AND the director will be on the alert. P.P.S. IMO, the best shooting opportunities come in the play! Also, try playing IMPs tactics at MP & MP tactics at IMPs. Abnormal results are almost certain, :lol:

Interesting... And So, I have the freedom to bid 3♥ and partner will know that I probably have ♠ support, :P The old-fashioned rule about not bidding a Weak Two with 4-cards in the other major... I think I will stick with that rule... mostly, B) I agree with Chamaco on many of his posts, in my experience there are few things that confuse a beginner more than an undisciplined partner. However, Give me a beginner, everytime! Finally, with respect to MP... To score 50% over two hands? 25% + 75% OR 0% + 100%? Sometimes it is best just to take your lumps! Dragon Rule of MP scoring: It takes two tops to overcome a bottom.

(1) Yes. 1♥, I have a 7- loser hand. (2) Pass. I trust my partner to balance. (3) 1♠. Is there any other choice? (4) Double. My partner is trusting me to balance, B)

The only pre-empt I lose out on is a weak 2♦!! A small price to pay! 2♦ is the eternal problem child, unless you play Benji, :lol: Still, one could use 2♦ as Flannery...

Directors have tough job, try it ONCE. I once psyched in a National tournament... the director was called... no time-out for filling in a psych form! The psych was good but opps couldn't handle it, they went down in 5♦ when 4♠ was cold, :lol: Anyone who takes on the job deserves our support.

<It IS awful because you are taking up 2 bids to show strong hands that will rarely occur.> One uses two bids because of the ambiguity in the term "strong hands". The argument between Benji & Reverse Benji is only for Benji converts, :lol: Cf. 0314 or 1430... The main argument for Benji is the usefulness of Weak Twos and the uselessness of 2♣ & 2♦! I use one bid to say "Powerhouse! Do you have a suit, P?" and the other to say "BIG hand! I'm interested in your controls, P." Both expect to go to game but neither is, per se, a game force.

For an Advanced/Expert player... fair comment, :lol: For a Beginner/Intermediate? I would maintain that Weak Twos should be disciplined! The exact limits of a Weak Two are open to partnership agreement, but if I am playing with a Beginner/Intermediate player; my partner can trust that I have: 6-10hcp, mostly in the named suit. 6 cards in the named suit. Less than 4 cards in the other major. Yes, I will relax the discipline with a more advanced player, but I think Beginners/Intermediates appreciate a partner that they can trust.

Quite a convoluted situation, :lol: I would agree with the Director in that: 2♥ was NOT a cue-bid! It was Stayman! Which would not be the natural meaning, it should therefore be alerted. I do disagree with the director's comment about 3♦, just because your opponents bid a fictiious ♦ suit doesn't mean that 3♦ loses it's natural meaning. Having said that, I don't think that your opponents have much to gripe about, since 2♥ is obviously some kind of take-out. What was the director's deciscion? Average minus to you? Fair for a very minor transgression. It is wise to avoid discussing contentious bidding with one's opponents, call the Director and explain to him/her. A really fun possibility occurs if you had alerted 2♥ as a cue-bid, and LHO had forgotten that they were playing 2♦ as showing ♥s.

Yup, but the thread is "SAYC and 2/1 Discussion", :lol: Where the Weak NT would count as a convention?

I also prefer Howell, whenever possible, but it is only really for small numbers. P.S. to Ben... Dragon hates small tables, not enough leg/tail room, :D Better to play on the floor, tried the ceiling where there is even more room but the cards seem to prefer the floor, <shrug>

If responder knows that opener "knows" that responder will bypass a weak 4-card ♠ suit (alertable?) - opener should still bid 2♠. Then responder, with ♥ support, has to find a bid other than 3♠! 3♣/♦ is forcing... 3♥-4♥?

Whether it is a convention or not depends on your basic system, :D However, on Chamaco's criteria? The Weak NT!

AND... Suffering dirty looks from your cat, :D