Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Anthony Pettengell
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this is a very fair point. Any argument for which bid should be which?

Absent such an agreement I'm not surprised at the large majority for double, and it's what I did at the table. I'm confident that it was the best of the options available, but the fact that this hand is a problem does indeed advocate for a change such as you are suggesting.
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I understand the second thoughts at the table. Before I'd read the agreements, having seen the hand and auction, my first thought was “I hope 4 is a fit-jump…”; much easier if you can fit-jump to game level.

If 5 came back round to me after 3, I would be uncomfortable, I agree, but I want to introduce my hearts and show my spade fit. 3 is the only way I can do that with these agreements. I can understand those who prefer to splinter.

That continuation might be quite an interesting bidding poll actually, mind if I post it?
March 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have quite some sympathy for a 3 bid, and would be perfectly happy if partner chose that with this hand, despite choosing 2 myself.
March 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 immediately over 2 would potentially be fit-showing depending on agreements. I would have bid 3 instead of 3 though.

Given where we are, I’m passing, without any concern.
March 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure “almost always” is true, given a weakish doubleton and a 4-4 fit the fit will often play notably better. The problem is that when you don't have that fit, getting higher will just make things exponentially worse.

I agree with those that say there is no escape until doubled (save standard transfers/garbage Stayman). As to what escape system, there are various options and it's not that important which you use.

Ideally you’ll have a different system for 1N (P) P (x) P (P) compared to 1N (x), but whether it's worth the system memory is arguable - I think I've only had that auction once.
March 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In contrast to the similar poll with a 1 opening, I'm not slightly interested in seeking slam here - only 3 trumps and generically game-going (if slightly control-rich) values.
March 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are your agreements re continuations after 2NT? While there might be slam I'm not sure I'll find out what I need to know (/allow partner to find out, if your system allows that), and if I'm unlikely to find that information out then I'd prefer not to leak the information and will just bid 4.

It's very counterintuitive bidding 4 on these hands if you ‘grew up’ with an approach-forcing system, but it is a benefit of limited opening bids that you can consider it.
March 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would certainly think a while without a BIT opposite, but I agree that when North has had a large BIT (beyond the extent of the 10s from the stop-bid) that I wouldn't consider bidding.

That said, I wouldn't be quick to criticise a pause before pass, because you don't know what's going through their mind. It may be a very aggressive bidder who needs to stop and think to make sure that P is a logical alternative… though that kind of player would probably have bid 3 the first time around!
March 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2N would not have been forcing.
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that's an enlightening hand to distinguish, and I definitely agree with you.
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The trump ace remains in the hand without any clubs, so no clubs can be cashed.
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While I would consider this to be worth 16 HCP were I opening, with that holding in the majors with a Multi 2 on my right I don't want to bid 2NT. I'll treat it as the literal 15 HCP and double.
Feb. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think 2NT in your auction is less obviously the minors (1NT after an overcall might have neither minor and long spades, unlike after an initial pass), but if you tend to pass with those hands then fair!
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I treat this as too strong to open 1NT with most partners, hence 1, but I understand the lure of a 1NT opening and don't denigrate it. For me it has nothing to do with double majors & small doubleton. The pure HCP combinations without tenaces are suggestive of 1m though.
Feb. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Bill: I'm surprised I didn't get a unanimous result on this one, though to be fair it's close to it in BW terms!
Feb. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps I've spent too long playing student bridge…
Feb. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As to the lead, A was what I lead at the table for the same reason. It didn't work out, but I'm glad others seem to agree with my logic.
Feb. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have no disagreement with those who suggest this is too strong for the bid. I certainly would open 1 rather than a weak 2, were a weak 2 opening available to me, but different considerations apply when overcalling, and vulnerable this felt appropriate as a 2 overcall to me, just.
Feb. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wish I had thought of this at the table, I agree it is the best course without further agreements. We had no prior agreement as to whether 3 was forcing, and I wasn't going to risk as score of +170/200/230… I therefore just bid 4, which I knew was wimpy, but thought it best to be safe.
Feb. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At the point when you play this hand you have no idea how strong either opponent is, other than the context of the match. I'm new-ish to the area still and didn't recognise them.
Jan. 23
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
.

Bottom Home Top