[The_Badger]

I think the adverse vulnerability comes into the equation here too. I used to know a number of players who would open the multi on a five card suit with 5431 even at red/white, so West's XX could be - although it isn't - more like a support redouble given the red/white status. With points, but not enough strength to bid a forcing 2NT on the first round in response to the multi, but with some spade support.

I think South needs to proceed with caution here. I like Mike's (miamijd) splinter of 4♠ but if partner says 5♣ in response, I don't think you have enough to bid one more.

[pescetom]

 Tramticket, on 2018-September-19, 06:06, said:

Yes, but Orlando is a world championship. Not a supervised practice session helping the beginners to transition to proper duplicate bridge.

The WBF certainly weren't thinking about beginners when they defined the brown sticker policy. Probably they thought that memorizing defences against every possible destructive opening should not be necessary.

[pescetom]

Duplicate

[pescetom]

 sfi, on 2018-September-19, 06:51, said:

That's just bizarre. The regs even specify that multi isn't brown sticker but still allow a written defence to it, which makes it even stranger.

Originally it was a brown sticker. Logically it still is, but they made it an exception. The fact that they left the ability to play a written defence suggests a guilty conscience.

[sfi]

 pescetom, on 2018-September-19, 15:13, said:

The WBF certainly weren't thinking about beginners when they defined the brown sticker policy. Probably they thought that memorizing defences against every possible destructive opening should not be necessary.

It really shouldn't be necessary, because it's straightforward to have general rules that cover the full range of strange two-level bids. People who play in Australia encounter this so often at club level that even newish players are comfortable defending against them.

The issue isn't one of complexity - it's one of familiarity. You suggest that open 2H to show 5/5 in clubs and spades, or a weak hand with diamonds, or a strong hand with hearts or a balanced 23-24 (for example) is "destructive". It's not - it's just different to what you are used to playing against. These conventions all allow the pair to show a wider range of hands and to try and make life difficult for the opponents at the same time. That's not inherently destructive - that's exactly what every agreement should do.

[helene_t]

The BBF version of Godwin's law: Every topic will eventually regress to a discussion of system regulation policies.

[FelicityR]

Here is the whole hand

---

After partner bid 3♣ I thought that he's unlikely to have anything in spades, and could well have the ♣K but we were playing RKCB (1430) so couldn't bid 4NT - hopefully agreeing clubs - and elicit any further information. Even without the ♣K, it could drop singleton; or, he might have ♥K and we could throw some heart losers on the diamonds; or, he might have QJx in hearts, etc. And if he had the ♣K we might be missing seven clubs.

So after what seemed ages I thought why not bid six clubs as a compromise, between five and seven, because there's a reasonable possibility it could come in. I don't know if that's logical, but sometimes you have to bid what you think is right.

Alas, West doubled, and that was the bottom score for us on that board. Was I unlucky or stupid?

[Tramticket]

 FelicityR, on 2018-September-20, 05:59, said:

Was I unlucky or stupid?

Unlucky.

And I still don't know what was intended by the redouble!

[Cyberyeti]

 FelicityR, on 2018-September-20, 05:59, said:

Here is the whole hand

---

After partner bid 3♣ I thought that he's unlikely to have anything in spades, and could well have the ♣K but we were playing RKCB (1430) so couldn't bid 4NT - hopefully agreeing clubs - and elicit any further information. Even without the ♣K, it could drop singleton; or, he might have ♥K and we could throw some heart losers on the diamonds; or, he might have QJx in hearts, etc. And if he had the ♣K we might be missing seven clubs.

So after what seemed ages I thought why not bid six clubs as a compromise, between five and seven, because there's a reasonable possibility it could come in. I don't know if that's logical, but sometimes you have to bid what you think is right.

Alas, West doubled, and that was the bottom score for us on that board. Was I unlucky or stupid?

Unlucky for 2 reasons, 6♣ needs no more than clubs 2-1 and LHO psyched a multi.

[msjennifer]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-20, 08:47, said:

Unlucky for 2 reasons, 6♣ needs no more than clubs 2-1 and LHO psyched a multi.

I saw the post too late.However, there is nothing wrong to express my thoughts before knowing what partners hand was.This hand is a rather unusual hand which is not easy to find a solution for without prior understanding.I was in full agreement with Felicity albeit with a little reservation.Not playing Lebensohl it remains only a pure guessing game which I try to avoid as far as possible.If over the 2Sxx it would be harder to imagine partners hand had he bid 3H.However after the Club bid I would bid only 5C rather than taking a stab in the dark. as it were. since I don't know what a bid of 4S would be construed as. (there are just 3 losers as played in clubs) .As far as defence to multi is concerned the beginners may read an article written by Eric Crowhurst in our British Briidge Magazine in the June and July 1982 issues under the heading Modern Acol Bidding,Countering The Multi.Therein he has given a development for the NORMALLY occurring hands for the players in 2nd,4th and 6th seat ,and certainly worth giving a thought even today after 36years.

[Tramticket]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-20, 08:47, said:

LHO psyched a multi.

RHO bid the multi. Not exactly a classic, but not a psyche.

[Cyberyeti]

 Tramticket, on 2018-September-20, 12:14, said:

RHO bid the multi. Not exactly a classic, but not a psyche.

Sorry missed that, and I'd weak 2 or multi that hand every day of the week. I'd also seriously consider passing it with the W hand, particularly if there was any flicker of interest from South anticipating a lousy 2♥ contract and S waking up.

[Tramticket]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-20, 12:19, said:

I'd also seriously consider passing it with the W hand, particularly if there was any flicker of interest from South anticipating a lousy 2♥ contract and S waking up.

Maybe, but west has quite a bit of defence - that singleton king rates to be a defensive trick.

[bonnylee]

I'll bid 6C.all I need is a 5-card suit from patner; red losers could be dis carded.

[pescetom]

 Cyberyeti, on 2018-September-20, 12:19, said:

I'd also seriously consider passing it with the W hand

That's one of the reasons why I feel south's bidding was not just unlucky.