Accused -and ejected!

[inquiry]

Slightly off-topic: I think its possible to have a non-scoring option, where although the hands you play are compared against others, and you receive a score, you can't see other people's records and they can't see yours. (fair's fair)

 

Don't have to appear in myhands in that case(?)

 

Rain

I guess this is ok if and only if your score is not reflected in ANY WAY in the result of the hand...

 

In otherwords if you bid and made 6H and not a single other person bid to slam, you will see that you win a zillion imps, but your 6H making is totally invisible in calculating the score of the hand. After all, if it was reflected, I would be scartching my head as to why my 4H making six lost imps when it was the best anyone did (of what I could see).

 

You can already do this by playing preexiting hands..... (vugraph), as you can see how your scores compare against good players with your hands (has this been turned back on)?

 

Ben

[HeartA]

Your 4♥ bid was entirely normal.

 

Partner's 3♥ was aggressive, but so what? If he bids only 2♥, you will make an invitation and he will accept. Anyway, what does a huddle followed by 3♥ imply anyway? If anything it implies that it is a stretch, so the UI would suggest passing rather than bidding on.

 

It really sounds to me like they had no genuine reason to complain. As Flame says, they are probably a bad loser. Although I am wary to make any diagnosis having only heard one side of the story.

 

Eric

I think 3H was normal. When in training session with my real-life friend, I told him that raised to 2 with 13-15 points (including distributional points), to 3 with 16-18, to 4 with 19-21, cue-bid at 4-level (or bid opening suit at 4-level) with strong 2-suiter (one of them is pd's suit, of course).

 

West has 13 VERY good hcp, good 5-card clubs, and 3 distributional points. It qualifies 3H raise.

[EricK]

Your 4♥ bid was entirely normal.

 

Partner's 3♥ was aggressive, but so what? If he bids only 2♥, you will make an invitation and he will accept. Anyway, what does a huddle followed by 3♥ imply anyway? If anything it implies that it is a stretch, so the UI would suggest passing rather than bidding on.

 

It really sounds to me like they had no genuine reason to complain. As Flame says, they are probably a bad loser. Although I am wary to make any diagnosis having only heard one side of the story.

 

Eric

I think 3H was normal. When in training session with my real-life friend, I told him that raised to 2 with 13-15 points (including distributional points), to 3 with 16-18, to 4 with 19-21, cue-bid at 4-level (or bid opening suit at 4-level) with strong 2-suiter (one of them is pd's suit, of course).

 

West has 13 VERY good hcp, good 5-card clubs, and 3 distributional points. It qualifies 3H raise.

I think it depends to some extent on what your opening 1NT range is.

 

If you play a strong NT, then a raise to 2♥ may be on a weak NT hand, and obviously the playing strength of this hand is way above that. But if you play a weak NT then a raise to 2♥ will necessarily have some extras (either in HCP if balanced, or in distribution if unbalanced).

 

On the other hand, to say this is a raise to 3♥ suggests that with a trick extra you will force to game but with a trick fewer you would only raise to 2♥. I am not sure this hand meets those criteria: Is ♠4 ♥A743 ♦J85 ♣AJ863 even an opening bid? Only just, if at all. Is ♠4 ♥A743 ♦AK5 ♣AJ863 a GF? Maybe, but it seems a slight stretch when an invite will probably get you to 4♥ whenever it's right anyway.

 

Obviously, if Fred says it is a 3♥ bid, then it probably is. But this is my reasoning for saying that 3♥ is a bit aggressive.

 

Eric

[HeartA]

On the other hand, to say this is a raise to 3♥ suggests that with a trick extra you will force to game but with a trick fewer you would only raise to 2♥. I am not sure this hand meets those criteria: Is ♠4 ♥A743 ♦J85 ♣AJ863 even an opening bid? Only just, if at all. Is ♠4 ♥A743 ♦AK5 ♣AJ863 a GF? Maybe, but it seems a slight stretch when an invite will probably get you to 4♥ whenever it's right anyway.

 

Obviously, if Fred says it is a 3♥ bid, then it probably is. But this is my reasoning for saying that 3♥ is a bit aggressive.

 

Eric

In my standard, ♠4 ♥A743 ♦AK5 ♣AJ863 certainly qualifies for GF (after 1C opening and 1H response from pd).

[fred]

Your 4♥ bid was entirely normal.

 

Partner's 3♥ was aggressive, but so what? If he bids only 2♥, you will make an invitation and he will accept. Anyway, what does a huddle followed by 3♥ imply anyway? If anything it implies that it is a stretch, so the UI would suggest passing rather than bidding on.

 

It really sounds to me like they had no genuine reason to complain. As Flame says, they are probably a bad loser. Although I am wary to make any diagnosis having only heard one side of the story.

 

Eric

I think 3H was normal. When in training session with my real-life friend, I told him that raised to 2 with 13-15 points (including distributional points), to 3 with 16-18, to 4 with 19-21, cue-bid at 4-level (or bid opening suit at 4-level) with strong 2-suiter (one of them is pd's suit, of course).

 

West has 13 VERY good hcp, good 5-card clubs, and 3 distributional points. It qualifies 3H raise.

I think it depends to some extent on what your opening 1NT range is.

 

If you play a strong NT, then a raise to 2♥ may be on a weak NT hand, and obviously the playing strength of this hand is way above that. But if you play a weak NT then a raise to 2♥ will necessarily have some extras (either in HCP if balanced, or in distribution if unbalanced).

 

On the other hand, to say this is a raise to 3♥ suggests that with a trick extra you will force to game but with a trick fewer you would only raise to 2♥. I am not sure this hand meets those criteria: Is ♠4 ♥A743 ♦J85 ♣AJ863 even an opening bid? Only just, if at all. Is ♠4 ♥A743 ♦AK5 ♣AJ863 a GF? Maybe, but it seems a slight stretch when an invite will probably get you to 4♥ whenever it's right anyway.

 

Obviously, if Fred says it is a 3♥ bid, then it probably is. But this is my reasoning for saying that 3♥ is a bit aggressive.

 

Eric

You are 100% correct that playing a weak notrump system 2H is plenty on the hand in question.

 

Assuming a strong notrump system, does adding the King of diamonds make the hand worse a game force? Close I would say. Keep in mind that all raises have ranges - they do not show specific hands. The actual hand is a minimum for jump raise (at least in my view). Adding the King of diamonds makes it either a maximum for a jump raise or a minimum for a game force. I would probably force to game myself, but I don't think that bidding 3H is awful or anything.

 

I don't buy your argument about the 1-4-3-5 10 count. If you knew that after opening 1C on such a hand your partner would respond 1H, then I think it is fine to open (because your hand reevaluates to be worth an opening bid and you can comfortably raise to 2H). In the much more likely event that your partner responds 1S, however, you will be in trouble. Therefore you should not open (unless your partnership has agreed to play very light opening bids).

 

One guideline I like to use when deciding between a single raise and jump raise is this: if partner needs nothing more than 5 reasonable trumps and the right distribution to make game a reasonable propostion, you should jump raise.

 

The actual hand opposite:

 

xxxx

KQxxx

xx

xx

 

for example, offers a reasonable play for game. So according to my guideline, it is worth a jump raise.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[luis]

This is the problem of online bridge, you can't punch this guy playing through the internet.

At f2f bridge you can just simply ask him to discuss the aspects of the bidding in the street....

[inquiry]

This is the problem of online bridge, you can't punch this guy playing through the internet.

At f2f bridge you can just simply ask him to discuss the aspects of the bidding in the street....

On line, the virtual way to invite your rude opponent into the street is to send an email to abuse@you knowwhere . com. This kind of talk is not acceptable (as Fred noted) on BBO. While it is true that for a first, and maybe even a second offense, not much will happen to the person speaking this way. But after a few times (or one extremely bad time)... abuse will more than figuratively punch them in the nose for you.

 

And if you actually think your opponents are cheating (as your opponents thought incorrectly I might add, that you were), you don't tell them that to their face. You write to abuse too... and let abuse handle that part for too. Of course, like everyone in this thread, it will be obvious to abuse that this is normal bridge... so about the only thing that happens is abuse will inform the complainer of such.

 

Ben