[pinkiron]

you have akxxx,xx,kx,akjx partner opens 1c you bid 1s partner bids 1nt what is your bid?

[1eyedjack]

2D nmf I suppose. Some might bid 2S first time around; then can support Clubs in GF

[Phil]

Hi Floyd welcome to the forums.

Start with whatever flavor of NMF you play. If partner supports spades, you can set a force and do some cuebidding, but youll likely end up in 6C or 6S depending on how things go.

[Zelandakh]

Hello pinkiron and welcome to the BBO forums. First of all, system matters and is not the same in all parts of the world. Assuming you play some kind of strong NT, 5 card major base, the most typical advance here would be an artificial forcing call, usually 2♦ as mentioned by the previous 2 posters. To flesh out the continuing auction, if Opener shows 3 spades, you would set them as trumps and go slamming. If partner denies 3 spades or 4 hearts you set clubs and go slamming. If partner shows 4 hearts you in turn show 5 spades. If partner now denies 3 spades you know there is a club fit so either way you can continue towards a probable slam knowing that there is a suit fit available.

[wank]

Phil, on 2016-April-18, 20:22, said:

Hi Floyd welcome to the forums.

Start with whatever flavor of NMF you play.

evidently none.

[PhilG007]

4NT Blackwood agreeing clubs as trumps If partner has the necessary controls,then there's a very good chance of 6♣making.
The unbalanced distribution suggests my hand has ruffing values and would therefore be more valuable in a trump
contract rather than in NTs.

[helene_t]

PhilG007, on 2016-April-19, 05:58, said:

4NT Blackwood

4NT is quantitative.

[Zelandakh]

Sorry pinkiron, PhilG likes to post some misdirection in threads sometimes. It is a little unfair to do it here as you are new to these forums - you will learn soon enough which posters to trust. As Helene points out, 4NT directly over 1NT would be a natural slam invite. Moreover, RKCB for clubs would simply be a bad choice. Opener might easily have a 3=4=3=3 hand, in which case spades and NT will both most likely play better than clubs.

[1eyedjack]

Zelandakh, on 2016-April-19, 15:59, said:

PhilG likes to post some misdirection in threads sometimes.

I reckon you give him too much credit. I am inclined to the view that he sincerely believes his own advice.

[Vampyr]

1eyedjack, on 2016-April-19, 17:27, said:

I reckon you give him too much credit. I am inclined to the view that he sincerely believes his own advice.

I am not sure it is possible. Surely we all remember the hand where lefty opened, we have a 5/5 19- count, and PhilG advocated passing? That post, at least, was not serious.

EDIT: Found it. It is most entertaining.

[Stephen Tu]

Vampyr, on 2016-April-19, 18:00, said:

I am not sure it is possible. Surely we all remember the hand where lefty opened, we have a 5/5 19- count, and PhilG advocated passing? That post, at least, was not serious.

EDIT: Found it. It is most entertaining.

I'm pretty sure it's possible. The incompetent are often simply unable to realize the depths of their own incompetence. See Dunning-Kruger effect. To me it's perfectly possible that Phil has been trapped playing in a solely rubber bridge playing circle for past 40 years or whatever with people playing antiquated methods, not exposed to an environment where michaels cue bids or negative doubles are routine, not playing duplicate, then somehow managed to discover BBO and the forums a couple years ago. And has a completely warped view of what constitutes good bridge, and of his own skill level.

If it is all an elaborate prank, then it's a pretty long time to be running a prank.

[Vampyr]

Stephen Tu, on 2016-April-19, 20:15, said:

If it is all an elaborate prank, then it's a pretty long time to be running a prank.

Not as long as the Secret Bridge Olympics (so far).

I miss 32519.

[nullve]

Vampyr, on 2016-April-20, 01:17, said:

I miss 32519.

I've never understood what he did to deserve all the ridicule.

[fromageGB]

What to rebid depends on what you think partner knows.

If it is a random partner on BBO then you should assume they play common agreements, and you can happily bid 2♦ as the minor that has not yet been mentioned. This is assumed to be forcing, and opener will try to make a descriptive rebid, such as spades with 3 card support. You can then decide on a spade, club, or NT contract. You have the strength to try for a slam.

If it is a friend with whom you have started together, and you have no agreements, then you must find some bid that you think is forcing. Clearly bidding spades will not be forcing, and would 2♦ be taken as forcing? If not, you might want to bid 3♦ and then keep bidding something else when partner keeps raising. You should reach slam by that point and he might stop. If he is from a UK background, he might take 2♣ as forcing, even though he has bid the suit. If you think none of these will work, then PhilG's scorned advice might do it. Many beginners say 4NT is always ace asking. Failing that, you could bid 4♣. This is not going to be passed and may be taken as ace asking. If he bids 5♣, bid 6♣.

It should be emphasised that the best way forward is an exploratory bid such as new minor forcing, to determine first what the contract denomination should be. Then you determine the level.

[Cyberyeti]

nullve, on 2016-April-20, 04:44, said:

I've never understood what he did to deserve all the ridicule.

Well quoting the bible as fact deserves ridicule IMO let alone his bridge atrocities

[Phil]

32519 (WTF does that mean anyway? Zipcode? Population of their city? ) was an annoying intermediate but I don't think (s)he had a mean bone in their body. Sprinkling texts with religious references didn't bother me personally and added some balancing (however incorrect) views to the community.

The troll du mois however is a bad bridge player that spouts dangerous advice to new visitors of the fora with no other redeeming value.

[manudude03]

I wonder how his battle in legalizing the Lee Two Diamonds went. I think a lot of the time, he was reading into things and just coming to the wrong conclusion, like when he said that too many 2NT hands were going down when partner is broke meant that the 2NT opener was too light rather than almost any hand is just going to play badly when partner puts down a yarborough.

[fromageGB]

manudude03, on 2016-April-20, 10:18, said:

I wonder how his battle in legalizing the Lee Two Diamonds went. I think a lot of the time, he was reading into things and just coming to the wrong conclusion, like when he said that too many 2NT hands were going down when partner is broke meant that the 2NT opener was too light rather than almost any hand is just going to play badly when partner puts down a yarborough.

This is a very valid argument. Of course you cannot prevent partner placing a yarborough on the table, but you can make it more bearable by not having silly opening bids. Not so long back, many people round here were opening 2NT on 19/20.

[manudude03]

fromageGB, on 2016-April-20, 12:10, said:

This is a very valid argument. Of course you cannot prevent partner placing a yarborough on the table, but you can make it more bearable by not having silly opening bids. Not so long back, many people round here were opening 2NT on 19/20.

I had a meeting with a new partner this morning. He mentioned he played 19-20 2NT, I took that off the card before he finished his sentence . That range is really common where I am though, probably more common than any other range.

edit: The point of his argument if I remember right was that 2NT should be something like 23-24, while not suggesting any way to fill up the rest of the NT ladder.
Too many 2NT contracts are going down

[fromageGB]

manudude03, on 2016-April-20, 12:24, said:

The point of his argument if I remember right was that 2NT should be something like 23-24, while not suggesting any way to fill up the rest of the NT ladder.

Can't oblige, but I can offer 2NT as 21/22 in a sound NT ladder ! That's with 1NT = 15/16. If you don't mind a 3-point range 1NT, then 2NT = 22/23.