You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Steve, that was a pretty exhaustive list of reasons I abstain as well. One other I do though: It's an opening lead problem, so I'm not going to go through the lengthy process involved there.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
WRT #3, after a 1NT response, whatever the meaning, 2♣ can continue relay and higher responses can transfer captaincy (any hand that suspects 3NT is the end contract and fits in your captaincy transfers - for us that means either both majors or neither, although you can fit in balanced or no major instead or other hand types of your choice)
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my experience, designing the whole system to try to right-side is a mistake. In addition to making everything harder to remember, we don't know what suit is trump and which side is correct is variable. If one hand is showing, then that hand should generally not declare if possible though.
To that end, I'd probably use the first step to initiate relay and the second step to establish a fit with a minimum (putting you into a choice of games auction unless responder has extra values)
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I actually gave the kids a card-holding lesson I learned from Billy Miller. I held the cards exactly vertical and moved them slowly toward the middle of the table. They couldn't see my hand until it got to the center. I did the same thing with my cards tilted and they could see it much sooner.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with all this, but am confused as to why you think the 1♦ opening showing an unknown major is disallowed. Let's say you chose to play 1♦ as all hands with at least one 4+ card minor suit and no 4-card major and 1♣ as all balanced hands without a minor (not that I'm recommending this - also, I'm switching the minor suits to 1♣ so the treatment would at least fall into the not-completely-stupid category)
I don't see how that runs foul of the rule that the bid shows length in a known suit other than the one opened.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why shouldn't 4♥ show a diamond 1-suiter with the heart void? 4♣ is cheaper with clubs; whether it shows 5 is the issue I suppose. I'd imagine a typical 4♥ call as 3=0=7=3 though.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think, had we bid 6♣ last round, partner might have corrected to 7♦. I'm not saying that was the proper action last round, just one that could have succeeded.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's pretty common and hardly unplayable. It opens up 1♠ to show 8-11 balanced, maybe without a stopper (otherwise unbiddable.) Or if you're weird like Sam Dinkin, it opens up 1♠ to start GF relay and have NF 2/1s.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Suggests defending. The defense might be better vs. hearts than diamonds, but we don't really have to worry about that. Our side has each limited our hands at this point, so it isn't like we're going to slam here.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just not true. The lack of alert tells her there was a failure to alert. That is all, and she needs to inform the opponents. Anything less is unethical.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Didn't read the whole thread, but with “No questions asked” it seems to me that declarer, prior to the opening lead, must disclose what she thought was the agreement. This is required.
She was confident enough about the meaning when she bid it.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the spade option is 10-14, then it DOES promise at least average strength. If it includes 9, it does not. Yes, they were told they could have been able to play it had they submitted it in advance. If they included 9, they would be able to play it without the submission.
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
It's an opening lead problem, so I'm not going to go through the lengthy process involved there.
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
To that end, I'd probably use the first step to initiate relay and the second step to establish a fit with a minimum (putting you into a choice of games auction unless responder has extra values)
Michael Shuster
1♠ = ♥
1NT = ♠
2♣ = Bal
2♦ = ♣
2♥ = ♦
At that point you are in pretty good shape to just follow up with symmetric relay; you'll generally have a control ask under 3NT.
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
I don't see how that runs foul of the rule that the bid shows length in a known suit other than the one opened.
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
–
AKxxx
Kxxxx
Axx
I'm not confident I'll get seven from that, and am concerned that he might bid seven on some hands where it doesn't fetch.
Another possible plan is 5NT followed by 6♥. But might that not be offering a choice between 6♥ and 6NT?
We're just too jammed to find a grand. So I give up.
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster
She was confident enough about the meaning when she bid it.
Michael Shuster
Michael Shuster