Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Anthony Pettengell
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would be perfectly happy with a 1NT rebid in SA, but wouldn't do it without prior discussion with partner. Ditto opening 1 and rebidding 2, though it's more of a strong/Polish club thing really, not worth adding that ambiguity when unnecessary.

I can't abide a 1 rebid here.
Aug. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would similarly be very interested in seeing other people's LaTeX templates - in my case EBU-format ideally, but anything would be interesting/useful.
Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you need to be quite judicious when deciding whether to open a Muiderberg 2 (ditto Lucas, Polish etc, whatever variant). It's not about HCP, quite the opposite, but purity. HCP in your long suits are good, and pointy doubletons are very bad. Qx/AJxxx/Kx/xxxx may technically have the points and distribution to open a Muidy 2, and a good enough heart suit for it, but I'd never open it as one at any vulnerability - FAR too defensive. x/AJxxx/xxx/KQxx is a far better candidate obviously, but so is x/AJxxx/xxx/xxxx even.

I opened 3 at the table, for similar reasons to you, but I feel I should be opening 2 in this position as per Kevin/Patrick above.
July 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I concur with 15-19. The 3NT rebid is ugly and so should be very specific - like Brad suggested, some kind of ‘picture bid’ perhaps. Even if don't have the time to work out a range enquiry yet, I think keeping all those balanced hands in 2NT (and allowing your normal strain enquiries below 3NT) is preferred. All these are workable though.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner will never take you for possibly having 6 hearts if you open 2, so the sixth heart would be lost. I can't imagine 2 as a viable bid on this hand myself - you've still preempted spades, and the disparity between the heart and club suits is extreme.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, you need a different system for that (unless your original runout system is relatively simple), because the forcing pass isn't available.
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's what I was expecting, 2 here but 3 in 1st or 3rd, but wanted to check the consensus. Thanks.
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, I should have defined that. In the U.K. many call them Lucas Twos, which are very similar as well (5 cards in the major, 4+ in any other suit - so could be both majors unlike Muiderberg).
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Garbage Stayman (i.e. short clubs) is pretty standard in the UK and well worth bearing in mind. You'll still end up missing major fits when you're weak and short in diamonds (or indeed only have one of the majors), but there we are. On other hands your opponents will miss major fits because they would have overcalled 1M (or doubled) 1m, but won't overcall 2M.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your methods opposite a 15-17 NT (strength appropriately modified) will be perfectly fine, particularly at first. 2-way Stayman isn't necessary. An escape to 1NT(x) is definitely required, but you don't need to be playing anything complicated.

1M-2x-2N really ought to be a good hand, 15+ balanced, irrespective of whether you open 1NT with 5cm. 1M-2x-3N is an ugly auction which should be avoided. Minimal 5332 hands have to rebid 2M if not opened 1NT, or raise with a 3-card suit - both of which I also dislike, which is why I open 1NT with those hands, but they're better than ruining the strong NT sequences in my opinion (and I agree, we would all prefer to open those hands 1M if possible - the problematic rebid is one of the few clear negatives of a weak NT).

Re opening light in the minors: much like the previous, when playing a weak NT you just shouldn't rebid 1NT after 1-1 with weak 1=4=3=5 hands, because 1NT ought to show strength. You do NOT want to be jumping to 2NT with 15 point balanced hands. Those weak hands have to rebid 2. You can open minor hands as light as you want, they don't conflict with the strong balanced hands.

I agree about 1m-1M-2M. Most strong balanced hands can cope with a 3M rebid. Some 15-counts would prefer 2M, but that's life/bridge.

Distinguishing 5-8 and 9-10 balanced opposite a 1m opening would be great, but isn't necessary to have a playable system. Yes, the auction 1X-1N-2N-AP is horrible (my least favourite uncontested auction I think), but there we are. Not worth the system memory when new to a weak NT.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed, an excellent book and well worth that price.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just about to comment almost this exact same thing. Just the right combination of
bridge- and people-balancing to be spot-on for an on-the-spot ruling at the club.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, that's rather co-dependant on responses being light. Opposite a partner who responds conservatively it's 2 all the way of course.

I'm more interested in the follow-ups than which opening to choose to be honest - and I fully agree with Yu that the 3 bid (after a 2 opening) has enough going for it (re slam investigation etc) that I don't think the 3/4 decision is as obvious as people are saying it is having seen both hands.
July 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm completely in agreement with Yu here, other than that sequence - though it can show this hand if you like, for me 1-1N-4 is like a stronger 4 opening, but definitely not this strong. I would rebid 3 if no gadgets are available. Gazzilli or similar is the obvious, and without such a gadget I don't mind the light 2 opening too much.
July 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My inclination is for natural and invitational, without discussion, but I'm not sure. The basis is that if very weak then 2 is expected even with only 4, and if strong then partner can be bidding 3 or 3NT. So invitational with exactly 4 spades and without hearts stopped seems reasonable.
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 2NT asked for a feature then I'd do the route described above - 2NT then RKCB after 3 (seeking 7), straight to 6 otherwise. My partnerships don't tend to have that (the standard in England is Ogust), so I'll do 5 exclusion - which unfortunately telegraphs a minor suit lead if the answer is negative. The bonus of 2NT is that if partner has no feature then we're in 6 without suit information being given to RHO for the opening lead.
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with both of those, No1 in particular, and I didn't fail to realise them from your original comment, but I don't want to give up on a potential 6 if partner has a stronger hand along with their heart suit.

I'm not saying a 4 bid is poor at all, I like your reasoning, I just don't think it's so clear/obvious that I could criticise 3.
June 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While I agree that 4 is the place to be, I don't think raising 3 to 4 is so clear. N has only shown 5 spades so far, and with such a good spade suit (and S still possibly having 2 spades in a stronger hand) 3 is fine. The continuation 3NT 4 would be better though.
June 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very true - I mean you'd hope never to have to lead from xxx against suit contracts if possible, but occasionally all other options are equally bad or worse.
June 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's generally the gist, and works fine in NT. In trumps, in an English 2/4 context you have the danger of being mistaken for a doubleton, with the second round being too late for the decision. Not an issue in Polish 2/4. I don't know Slawinski (will go and look it up now).
June 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.

Bottom Home Top