His passing range in this spot is far to wide for you to throw the towel directly.

The best thing you can do in bridge is describe your hand and not guess what partner has - he will tell you.

He can easily have some red suited hand with game potential, unfit for vulnerable weak jump or two suited overcall

ummm - I have honours right ?

1nt seems auto to me in a rubber game

He can also have:

xxx
xxx
xxxx
xxx

and we go down 3 in 2D

This is a rubber bridge question. No reason to go nuts with this hand. Just defend and collect dollars

who knew they talked bridge at this site

my favourite hand for a bit

Qxx
Kxxxx
xxx
xx

nil vul - teams - dealer opens 3D on your left and the full auction is;

3D X P 3H
P P 3nt P
P X XX all pass

your shot ?

Oh, and welcome to the thread SS ;-)

You're overcalling all 5-baggers with a 6-count vulnerable?

2003 reg date with a bridge related name. Nice. Welcome to the thread SS!

Surely if you pass 1S the plan is to collect DOLLAS by doubling 1N not passing it.

The problem is they might bid 2C. It's funny because 1C p 1S p 2C p p 2N probably shows a trap of spades and something really big/balanced. I am going to ask my regular partner what he'd think I had if I did that, I am going to bet he thinks 5 spades and a 20 count roughly lol.

At the one level opposite an unpassed partner? Sure, as long as it's a reasonable lead director. My partner and I play aggressive overcalls though.

r/r imps, east opens 1c in first seat

KJT86
KQT63
Q
85

partner is a random on bbo, he lists himself as advanced so i figure there's maybe a 5% chance he'll correctly interpret what me bidding/alerting 2c should mean, but wtf do i do when he responds 2d?

Don't play with randos on bbo ;-)

In a normal partnership, 2D is 100% to play.

I think you bid fine, partner obviously has a 4C call after your michaels bid (pick a game)

Qxx
Kxxxx
xxx
xx

nil vul - teams - dealer opens 3D on your left and the full auction is;

3D X P 3H
P P 3nt P
P X XX all pass

your shot ?

club is a good choice - Pard has

xxx
Jxx
x
AKQJxx

I have been surprised by the number of experts asked this problem who found a spade lead - that is what happened at the table - declarer had a rock including AKJxx spade and I discovered that 3ntXX making 12 not vul is a different way to score -1400...

heard many explanations for what to lead - seems to me that pard has no business doubling 3nt without cashers - i mean he is a well defined 11-16 or so with a diamond shortage opposite a possible yarborough - with cashers it can only be a club - a simple trust pard proposition clouded by the blue card...

i play with randoms on BBO almost daily - i think the first 2 golden rules are dont respond 2nt to 1 of a suit and dont make a 2 suited overcall

this hand is easy though - why not just overcall 1 spade and follow up with hearts ? - 2H is weird

SHIP IT

Yeah I don't think I am ever making a Michaels bid with a rando

Quite a few good players need to be dragged in front of an ethics committee and have their hands slapped very hard.

If you honestly disclose your tendency to respond with 0 opposite an opener, your opponents will choose to play 1NT natural. If you honestly disclose that you follow the standard rule about having 6 to respond, your opponents will choose to play 1NT artificial. If you claim to play "standard" but respond on 0 routinely, there's a not-very-nice 7-letter name for you beginning with C. (And if you use the phrase "it's just bridge" to describe your style, the committee should award you an additional penalty of a one broken jaw.)

I am sorry to say that in my experience, the liars considerably outnumber the disclosers.

No, not speaking about any specific members of this forum. Just making an observation about the jackassery I see frequently in live games.

sieg, your crusade is noble but not practical.

I don't agree (with brrrr), at least not completely. To some extent the expert game can be policed with respect to this sort of thing, and expert behavior sets the tone for the rest of the bridge world's. And siegmund is also right that people at the level represented in this tread — thoughtful intermediate-through-advanced, plus a couple of experts — are the ones who really need to think about it. No, we're not likely to wind up getting nailed by a committee, but everyone here is capable of learning and understanding the rule that your card needs to describe how you actually bid most of the time.

I've mentioned this in the thread with regard to notrump "adjustments": if you routinely adjust hands upward to be notrump openers, and never downward, then you need to change your card and if you don't, you're cheating. Everyone in this thread is capable of understanding that, and I applaud Siegmund for making it explicit.

i dont agree with Seigmund - in 25 years of competitive bridge at all levels i have come across maybe 2 players i would be comfortable calling cheats

you are allowed to "psyche" - it presents ethical problems and the psych-er needs to be quick to identify what they are and deal with them thoroughly - in an established partnership you need to remember if a psyche position happens more than once and advise your opponents but in reality it rarely assists

what annoys me about the issue is that the aggrieved seem to forget that the person psyching has taken a big risk - when i respond at the 1 level with a sub minimum pard always responds 2nt and we go 3 off - no-one complains when that happens - instead when i psyche and the ball sails out of the park suddenly an enquiry must be launched to establish if i cheated

siegmund seems obviously correct to me but my opinion is far from knowledgeable

Are you guys saying it is alertable if you respond with less than 6 points? I have never heard that from anyone, if it was true everyone would have to alert (not just experts, even little old ladies at the club will respond with less than 6 sometimes).

Where do you draw the line? Is anyone passing 1H with KQT9x x xxx xxxx? I have not encountered those people. Ok, maybe that is an upgrade and the hand is worth 6.

So how about Axxxxx xxx xxxx ---. Are you passing 1C? I doubt anyone is passing 1C. Is this a hand worth 6 even though it's 4? Or is it an alert of all responses since you respond with this.

Ok, so how about QT9xx Jxxxx xxx ---? Maybe some people pass that but I bet most on here would agree that's bad, we could easily have a game and even if we don't bidding and playing in a major is probably better than playing in 1C. So now we are responding with 3 points. Is that alertable?

If you think that responding with less than 6 should be alertable that is one thing (I disagree). You should talk to whoever makes up the alert procedures. If you think that it is alertable, show me where it says that, or find a director who says that, or find me anyone who alerts that. If you do not think it is alertable, then don't accuse people of cheating for not alerting it, that is ridiculous. I guess almost everyone in the world is a cheater.

Sieg and atak, I agree with what both of you are saying, and obviously people shouldn't cheat, but there are very simple things you can do to prevent yourself from being cheated which makes this discussion pointless.

For example, Sieg, I don't know a single person who plays 1NT with two different meanings depending on the minimum points for a 1M response in this spot, and rightfully so. It sounds like a terrible way to handle this auction.

Atak, does it really affect your decision in a meaningful way if the 1NT shows a good 14 to 17 or 15 to 17?

might affect his defense...

But yeah, I mean the alert procedures are clearly flawed, but we live with them, and this is part of why you should really only play with people who know what's what. Disclosure is good, pedantry and nittery are bad.