[PhilG007]

 mikeh, on 2013-September-20, 07:57, said:

Being wrong because one is uninformed (ignorant) is forgiveable: we are all ignorant in many aspects of human knowlwdge. Remaining wedded to one's ignorance after being told, by experts in the area, of the true situation is wilful stupidity.

See my reply to Stephen Tu above. I defy anyone to make a game contract on the hands given.
And as for being "wedded to my ignorance" it seems I'm in good company judging from the
twaddle I'm seeing on this forum and that from "pseudo experts" (!)

[Zelandakh]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:06, said:

Experience has shown time and again that misfits should be played as at low a level as possible.

Perhaps North should have considered that before rebidding 3♥. Moreover, 4♥ is not down yet.

[c_corgi]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-02, 01:01, said:

I would pass 3♠ What started out as a discussion is rapidly turning into an argument and a tug of war.
The bidding clearly shows a misfit...and one partner should give way and the sooner the better. Misfits should be played at as low a level as possible.

The sentence I put in italics is the key here. 3S only announces a dangerous misfit if the 3S bidder does not realise that one partner should give way ASAP. In any serious partnership the 3S bidder does realise this and will pass instead of bidding 3S. Therefore 3S does not mean "I have forgotten the principle of giving way ASAP", it means "Let us investigate the best contract by defining our hands further; in this case I have extra length and GF values".

[PhilG007]

 Cyberyeti, on 2013-September-19, 10:49, said:

Expect partner never to play with you again if you do, partner doesn't fight on a bad hand with spades unless he's prepared to bid 4♠, this is 100% forcing.

Partner can have many things, but a GF, at least 5 spades and less than 3 hearts unless slammish will be common to them, he may want to pass 3N if you can bid it, he may want to see if you have spade support, it may be an advance cue for hearts.

If partner doesn't want to play with me again,that's fine by me I'll find someone more sensible and disciplined.
If partner thinks 4♠ can make he should bid it direct instead of pussy footing around with 3Spades
which is NOT forcing and can be passed The rebid of one's suit,although highly invitational,is never forcing.
And to carry on bidding in the face of a gross misfit is just idiotic and bizarre.
It's one thing to have the misfortune to skid off the road,quite another to accelerate deliberately into a tree(!)

[PhilG007]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-September-20, 08:15, said:

Perhaps North should have considered that before rebidding 3♥. Moreover, 4♥ is not down yet.

North's 1♠ is forcing it's a change of suit South must reply
Even the rawest beginner knows that. I'm surprised you don't...
and you claim to be an expert(!)

[PhilG007]

 c_corgi, on 2013-September-20, 08:26, said:

The sentence I put in italics is the key here. 3S only announces a dangerous misfit if the 3S bidder does not realise that one partner should give way ASAP. In any serious partnership the 3S bidder does realise this and will pass instead of bidding 3S. Therefore 3S does not mean "I have forgotten the principle of giving way ASAP", it means "Let us investigate the best contract by defining our hands further; in this case I have extra length and GF values".

If South had support for ♠ he would have shown it instead of rebidding his own suit

[ArtK78]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:31, said:

North's 1♠ is forcing it's a change of suit South must reply
Even the rawest beginner knows that. I'm surprised you don't...
and you claim to be an expert(!)

Wow.

This is getting worse.

Of course 1♠ is forcing. The point made by Z was that North's 3♥ bid may be an overbid. He has a great hand if there is a fit, but without a fit it is not nearly as good.

This is becoming the PhilG007 thread, and it is getting progressively less amusing with each successive post.

[mikeh]

You know, I've got this terrible feeling that we're all being punk'd by someone using the name of PhilG007, who is getting more blatant with every post! If so, well done!!!

Otoh, I gather there is a player on BBO with that name whose results aren't exactly stellar, but a punkster is surely more credible than someone who really thinks like this guy claims?

[wyman]

 ArtK78, on 2013-September-20, 08:35, said:

This is becoming the PhilG007 forum, and it is getting progressively less amusing with each successive post.

FYP.

And did I misread, or has he referred to Mike as a "psuedo-expert"? LOL

[Cyberyeti]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:06, said:

Sorry but that is just total inanity. Look at these two hands:-

♠-
♥AQJxxxx
♦Q10x
♣ Kxx

♠AKQxxx
♥ -
♦xxx
♣ AJxx

They are an accurate reflection of the bidding given. The partnership has 26 points but the hand is a total misfit(!)
No game can be made in either hearts or spades and to bid 3NT on these hands is to go down among the dead men.
Experience has shown time and again that misfits should be played as at low a level as possible.

I'm not unhappy in 4♥ (a lot of the time you'll make even when it should have gone off as opening leader won't lead a diamond from AJxx or J♦ will be onside with hearts 3-3 or one hand or the other will hold AKx(x)). 3♠ is no bed of roses when 4♥ wasn't making, and in fact the diamond lead is more likely to hurt you.

3N can also easily make by N if diamonds are 4-3 with the J in the hole if either the hearts break or the club hook works.

If you refuse to bid game with a 7 playing trick 14 count opposite an opening bid, how can partner ever trust you ? next time you bid a nonforcing 3♠, his hand will be x, AQJ10xxx, xx, Kxx which is barely a 3♥ bid but 4♥ is excellent.

Among your so called "pseudo-experts" I notice a couple of people who've played at international level, when you're telling the whole world they're wrong, it's not usually them.

[PhilG007]

 mikeh, on 2013-September-20, 08:42, said:

You know, I've got this terrible feeling that we're all being punk'd by someone using the name of PhilG007, who is getting more blatant with every post! If so, well done!!!

Otoh, I gather there is a player on BBO with that name whose results aren't exactly stellar, but a punkster is surely more credible than someone who really thinks like this guy claims?

I checked your status on BBO Well,well so you ARE an expert...albeit a provisional one(!)
Fair enough,but don't berate the so called "dull and ignorant" in your eyes...they too have their story....

[wyman]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:49, said:

I checked your status on BBO Well,well so you ARE an expert...albeit a provisional one(!)
Fair enough,but don't berate the so called "dull and ignorant" in your eyes...they too have their story....

There is nothing provisional about Mike's expert status.

And if you would STFU and learn instead of stubbornly telling people who are way, WAY better than you that they are wrong, well, no one would call you dull and ignorant. And, indeed, you'd be, at the very least, less ignorant.

[PhilG007]

 Cyberyeti, on 2013-September-20, 08:43, said:

I'm not unhappy in 4♥ (a lot of the time you'll make even when it should have gone off as opening leader won't lead a diamond from AJxx or J♦ will be onside with hearts 3-3 or one hand or the other will hold AKx(x)). 3♠ is no bed of roses when 4♥ wasn't making, and in fact the diamond lead is more likely to hurt you.

3N can also easily make by N if diamonds are 4-3 with the J in the hole if either the hearts break or the club hook works.

If you refuse to bid game with a 7 playing trick 14 count opposite an opening bid, how can partner ever trust you ? next time you bid a nonforcing 3♠, his hand will be x, AQJ10xxx, xx, Kxx which is barely a 3♥ bid but 4♥ is excellent.

Among your so called "pseudo-experts" I notice a couple of people who've played at international level, when you're telling the whole world they're wrong, it's not usually them.

You will notice the two example hands given are very unbalanced? That could be reflected in the opposing hands
All the trumps could be bunched in one opponents hand. Believe me it CAN happen It's happened to me more than once
in my time(!) 26 points is a yardstick for a game contract...but that doesn't guarantee it will be bid or made(!)

[mikeh]

 wyman, on 2013-September-20, 08:43, said:

FYP.

And did I misread, or has he referred to Mike as a "psuedo-expert"? LOL

I've been called worse

[PhilG007]

 wyman, on 2013-September-20, 08:53, said:

There is nothing provisional about Mike's expert status.

And if you would STFU and learn instead of stubbornly telling people who are way, WAY better than you that they are wrong, well, no one would call you dull and ignorant. And, indeed, you'd be, at the very least, less ignorant.

It says "provisional" on the website... I believe what I see...don't you(?)

[ArtK78]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:59, said:

It says "provisional" on the website... I believe what I see...don't you(?)

I don't see anything on the website that says provisional. Not that I would care. Mike has played internationally representing Canada, and his reputation on these Fora is pristine (even if he has been called worse than "provisional").

[wyman]

Back on topic:

Suppose opener cues after 3S

1H 1S
3H 3S
4C

Is 4H now by responder is something like: "I have a good raise to 4H but had no minor cuebid over 3H"
If opener bids 4S now, is it a cue? to play?

---

Also, per Mike's comment about 3S taking the load of a number of borderline hands, how should responder show a hand like
AKxx Qx Qxx QJxx
AKQJ Kx xxxx xxx

or is this an argument to just GF (2m) with 4S/4m after 1H, and to have 1H-2m-2S not show extras?

[Cyberyeti]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:56, said:

You will notice the two example hands given are very unbalanced? That could be reflected in the opposing hands
All the trumps could be bunched in one opponents hand. Believe me it CAN happen It's happened to me more than once
in my time(!) 26 points is a yardstick for a game contract...but that doesn't guarantee it will be bid or made(!)

Yes one time in 50 at most it will be right to bid 3♠ and pass it.

On many more hands, the fact that I can bid 3♠ forcing on some even bigger hands in the knowledge that it won't be passed, will get me a good score, so I like the rest of the world play it forcing. This is even more the case if you don't play strong jump shifts, what are you supposed to do with 6-7 spades, 0-1 hearts and a 17 count ?

You also reveal that you have no knowledge of probabilities. In computer dealt hands, the fact that our hands are unbalanced does not change the standard probabilities for suit breaks among the opponents, it can for hand dealt stuff as an indication of imperfect shuffling, but I don't play many hand dealt boards these days.

[Vampyr]

PhilG007 you have been told before that there is much to be learned on these forums if you think about what other people have to say instead of arguing with them and playing the lone wolf all the time.

On this particular topic, you have made your thoughts clear. Your ideas on this topic, as well as on others, is highly eccentric, but that is no matter -- all viewpoints are welcome. But when others have kindly explained to you the way 99.9% of bridge players play the auction in question, the same statements over and over again are no longer interesting. Yet people are still trying to explain it to you because these forums are very friendly and helpful.

And more than that -- there are a number of posters about whom many of us will say: when I find myself in disagreement with them, I take another look at my methods and ideas, rather than arguing with them. What I may do is go back and ask questions if there is an aspect which I am still unsure about.

There is a wealth of talent on these boards, and the fact that players the calibre of (I am not going to mention names because I don't want to leave anyone out, although perhaps no one will be offended if I mention just one, Justin Lall) are willing to share their insights for free gives us all the opportunity to learn from some of the best players (and thinkers) in bridge.

[Zelandakh]

 PhilG007, on 2013-September-20, 08:31, said:

North's 1♠ is forcing it's a change of suit South must reply
Even the rawest beginner knows that. I'm surprised you don't...
and you claim to be an expert(!)

I certainly have never claimed to be an expert. I do claim to be intermediate and this is how my BBO profile reads.

Most beginners realise that there are many bids between 1♠ and 3♥ and that they do not need to jump just because they have a little more playing strength than a bare minimum. Most beginners also realise that when they hold 14hcp and partner has shown ~16, they need to be bidding some game even if the hand is a misfit. It is not impossible that we even have a grand slam here, say:

♠ Jxx
♥ AKxxxx
♦ A
♣ KQx

opposite

♠ AKQxxx
♥ -
♦ xxx
♣AJxx

Even J / AKxxxx / Axx / KQx is likely to be good enough. And there are plenty of better constructions for a small slam.

And finally, just so you know, the bboskill website has nothing to do with BBO whatsoever. I was confused as to what you meant by the BBO website, since I am confident no BBO website would use such a description. Bboskill is also highly unreliable. As an obvious example, gnasher has a rating of Advanced. Bboskill likes to rate me as an Expert. Yet Andy is considerably better than I will ever be. That is because he plays against better opponents. If bboskill is seriously your benchmark for self-rating then it is easy to understand why you might be misguided.

The rule on bbo is pretty simple - an Expert has success at national level. I have never even played in a national level event. You were already linked Mike's WBF record so you know that the Expert rating is more of an underbid than inflated. So why are you being deliberately obnoxious in your responses? Even a rank beginner in online forums knows that that is not the way to become part of a community. So please, calm down and take a step back. Start afresh and try to fit in.