Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Art Korth
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my opinion, North should not be keycarding. North described his hand well to South, and South has not described much at all. So South is the one who should be keycarding, if anyone.

But that is not the question being asked.

Once one partner takes control in a keycard auction, the other partner CANNOT overrule the asker on the final contract WITH ONE EXCEPTION. If the asker makes a call which confirms possession of all of the key cards, responder may be in a position to count 13 tricks and can then bid a grand.

Since that did not happen here, responder cannot overrule asker's conclusion.

To take this point one step further, responder must bid the grand IMMEDIATELY after the call which confirms possession of all of the key cards. If responder merely makes a reply to asker's inquiry, then asker signs off, responder cannot decide to bid a grand later. Responder gets no more authorized information from asker's action in response to responder's call, so responder cannot now decide to bid the grand. However, responder may get unauthorized information from the amount of time it takes asker to sign off in the small, and that is where problems arise.
Sept. 23
Art Korth edited this comment Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought it was Tom doing the talking here.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I always liked the way that “fortuitous” applies to card games. Playing no limit hold 'em, I once got to play a 42 and flopped a full house. I considered that to be extremely fortuitous.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have always referred to a 3-3 fit as a sub-Moysian. Interesting that a 4-2 fit would be a super-Moysian.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I echoed in spades to show my doubleton!” said Tom fortuitously.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree. It is an information bid, showing clubs, letting partner in on the nature of my hand and handing over responsibility to partner in the event that the opps compete over 5.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed:

With all due respect, stop with the procedural penalties.

PPs are advocated here on BW 1000 times for each real-life imposition of a PP. And 1000 times may be an understatement.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard:

Personally, I would allow declarer to play from the top in all cases.

But AKQx is different from 6542. While it should make no difference, players look at AKQx differently than 6542.

There is a limit to careless or thoughtless play. These examples are really pushing the limit. I would allow play from the top in all cases, and I think that the laws should incorporate this.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If anyone forces a player to play the x from AKQx it is a travesty. And anyone who interprets the laws to require that play is a Secretary Bird to the nth degree.

I cannot believe that two (!) posters take this position.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am very disappointed in both of you.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard and Ray: Please tell me that both of you are kidding.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a sense, it is a double squeeze. West is squeezed out of his hearts which in turn reveals that East has been squeezed out of his hearts.

Technically, it is a simple squeeze played as a double squeeze as only East is guarding hearts. But West's hearts are serving a function - protecting the fact that East is being squeezed out of his heart guard.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The laws do not favor “pros and elites.” The laws make a differentiation between players who would know and follow the correct line of play and those players who might mess it up.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bernard:

How many times would you see a novice or intermediate player play the AK of hearts first then run 4 diamonds and block the suit (and I am not even saying that the possible 4-0 diamond break has to be taken into consideration)? It shouldn't happen, but it does.

It may be going too far to say that a particular player making a claim without stating a line of play would manage to screw up the position, but it is going too far in the other direction to say that they wouldn't screw up the position.
Sept. 10
Art Korth edited this comment Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David: I am sure he meant to say diamonds, not clubs. Or perhaps he created the diagram wrong and the diamonds shown in the diagram should have been clubs.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I adopted Extended PLOB. PLOB (Petty Little Odious Bid) was Sonny Moyse's term for New Minor Forcing. Extended PLOB is:

1 - 1M - 2 - 2 artificial
1 - 1M - 2 - 3 artificial

In both cases, responder's second call of 2M or 2 (if is M) is nonforcing.
Sept. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would never double with the North hand. There is too much of a chance that it might end the auction, and North cannot take that chance.

If I were asked to name the final contract with the North hand, 6 would be my choice. But North is not being asked to name the final contract, so 4 makes sense. North can make some call on the next round. Either 6 or 5NT might work out.
Sept. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is a straight-forward bidding problem and should be posted as such.

Having said that, you should have bid 2 on the previous round to avoid this problem.
Sept. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed:

Playing XYZ, responder's 2NT rebid is a puppet to 3. So, if responder wants to sign off in 3, he can do so.

I really don't think that the inability to sign off in 2 is a hardship.
Sept. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“1♣ 1♥
1♠ 2♣
2♦ 3♠ is invite to game”

This treatment destroys one of the big advantages of using XYZ - the ability to make an invitational bid at the 2 level.
Sept. 3
.

Bottom Home Top