Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Aviv Shahaf
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I specifically said in one of the earlier installments of this bidding problem That I do not consider 3 to be Forcing.

I treat this sequence (Double followed by correcting 3 to 3) as a hand that can tolerate other strains, just not clubs…
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Let me try again…
Since a Splinter forces the partnership to a SPECIFIC game, it is by nature a Slam bidding tool.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“South must open 1
Why? I’m sure that even precision players are allowed to open 1 in 3rd seat with this hand…
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would bid 4 if we were Vulnerable.
Non Vul I give partner an out with 3.
This confirms a 6 card suit so partner can look at their hand and decide whether they are worth a raise or not.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don’t think 3 is forcing.
If you had a single suit Game forcing hand you could have cue-bid.
The Double simply indicates a flexible hand that can tolerate more than one strain.
When we correct 3 to 3 we simply tell partner that we can also tolerate Hearts or NT.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It feels like this should be a bidding poll…
Oct. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since a Splinter forces the partnership to at least a game, it is by nature a Slam bidding tool.
Otherwise there is no point in making that bid as opposed to simply bidding game without providing the defense extra guidance.
Sept. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think enough time has passed that the poll was not tainted…

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2-x4pcblns6g/?cj=859837#c859837

Pass is clearly a LA!
Sept. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass is clearly a LA!

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2-x4pcblns6g/?cj=859837#c859837
Sept. 28
Aviv Shahaf edited this comment Sept. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, While I totally agree with your general approach, I don't agree that a player who asks about an alerted bid would necessarily choose a different action for different explanations of the bid.
Many players ask simply because the bid was alerted and not because they care or need to know what it means.
Sept. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I totally support David on this.
We don't know the level of agreement between the partners.
OP stated: “…I was thinking Standard american limit raise.”
Apparently OP was playing “Standard American” and his partner was playing “Bergen”.

There are many situations where they could not claim to have a solid agreement.
Maybe it's not an established partnership and to save time they agreed to play one's card and the other didn't notice the “Bergen” agreement on it.
Maybe they played Standard American for 20 years and switched to Bergen last month and its the first time it came up.
Maybe they have been playing Bergen for years but forget it half the times.

There was a reason OP thought that 3 was the right bid to describe that hand.
That reason was not “Bergen Raise”…
Sept. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, so is it really worth it to assign a blame for missing a 60% Slam (If played by Michael Rosenberg…) at a club game?
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How good is 6 after opponents cash A and switch to a trump?
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that if West had 4-4-0-5 then they would rebid 2 over 2
or if they could have had 4-4-0-5 and rebid 2 then East would have bid 2 i/o 2NT.
so yes, I stand by my statement that it was a known 4-3 fit before the 4NT bid.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I lead the Q
Partner is highly likely to have at least 5 diamonds and if RHO had very strong diamonds they would not have offered 4 in a known 4-3 fit.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don’t think partner is asking us to pull this Double
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What is opener’s 1NT opening range?
What is opener expected to rebid with minimum balanced hand, outside of that NT range with good stoppers in Hearts and none in spades? (2 or 2NT)

If opener could have Jxx - AQxx - KJxx - xx then I like to bid 3.
If opener promise an unbalanced hand then I like to bid 3D.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I fill in as a director I go out of my way not to make any ruling against my opponents unless it is 110% clear.
I may educate them about proper etiquette and correct procedures…
Sept. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes!
1+1+Double…
Sept. 14
.

Bottom Home Top