Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Aviv Shahaf
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another case of Agreement Disruption.
West was playing the 2 bid as Michaels and East was playing it as Natural.
Silly Laws dictates that we need to decide which agreement they actually had, even though they clearly did not have one on this specific hand, and rule differently depending on which player we deem to have forgotten their actual “agreement”.
A much better way would be to treat all such incidents as if they did not have an agreement, which means that any explanation they give that state they have a specific agreement is MI.
This should be mostly solved when we start using electronic devices and bids will be self alerted.

Now, regarding the actual hand in OP…
Even if my wished for laws were in effect, I would still rule that there was no damage because both North and South should have been aware of what’s going on and should have Doubled 5 for a top.
In other words, the E/W actions did not cause damage, they were giving N/S a top on a silver platter.
July 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well,
West must proceed as if it was Michaels because they actually intended it as Michaels.
East proceeded as if it was Spades until it was clear from the auction that it can’t possibly have been spades.
July 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While it might help when partner gets to bid 3, it creates a much bigger headache when partner bids 2NT and the pesky opponents compete to 3 as in here.
Now you don't even know if partner has support or was trying to compete in Hearts or maybe even suggesting a weak H-C hand.
July 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Alan,

Wouldn’t you also need the same “entire 15 minutes” with this partner if you encounter a pair playing Polish club?

Would you and your partner need the “entire 15 minutes” every time you play against Sam’s system if someone starts playing it regularly at your club or would you become familiar with it after a few times playing against it?
July 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, The answer to the hands you gave could well be a matter of judgment as opposed to system.
This is no different than any other system where a hand might be opened 1NT or 1M or 2M based on the player’s judgment.
Why should only Sam need to commit these hands to a single opening?

Same apply to Marty’s qualms regarding the 1 opening.
How is that different then a precision 1 or a Swedish 1 openings for example?
The concept of a “catch all” bid for hands that don’t fit any other opening is not that exotic and not hard to defend against.
The only thing that Sam might add to his explanation is if it may include balanced hands with a 5 card major or 6 card minor out of range for a 1NT opening.
Other then that there is nothing unusual about the bid.

When is this nonsense going to stop.
This argument about restricting methods solely because players are unfamiliar with them is ridiculous!
allow the methods and players will become familiar with them.
Who knows, they might even adopt them…
July 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner didn’t have to Double, and would not have Doubled with a hand that could set 4 Spades but would go down if we pull.

I’m more worried about missing a slam then I am about not taking 11 tricks.
July 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are the advantages of this approach as opposed to 3 = Both Majors Strong and 3M Natural?
July 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I bid 3, then later if the opponents compete to 3 I can Double.

I wonder what the Doublers plan is when the inevitable 3 bid gets back around to them…
July 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you already shown your extras, and is known to hold the higher number, then partner is the captain and might be asking with fewer key cards (including Zero in some cases), so you have no choice but respecting their decision.

If on the other hand you never showed any extras, and could theoretically have Zero or One KCs, then the fact that partner asked for KCs tells you they have significant extras and all the missing KCs, so Pass is not a LA.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the responder to KC already shown the extra values then they have to Pass.
If the responder have undisclosed significant extras then Pass is not a LA when they have the upper number of KCs.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes Display Fusion (DF) is a program with many options but once you set it once it should run smoothly without the need for any adjustments by the directors.

I found the documentation very helpful when I was setting it up.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are so many other factors that will determine whether I Double or not.
Partner, Opponents, Pairs or Teams, How we are doing to that point, etc…
For what its worth, depending on the conditions, I will take the same action with both hands.
July 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At Honors we have been using DisplayFusion to control what is displayed on the big screen monitor.

The crucial setting is to make sure the Computrer screen is the default one and that any new window opens up there and not on the TV screen.
After that the user controls what they want to display on the TV screen.

Some directors still get confused at first when they forget they moved the results (or Leaders) window to the big screen and think ACBLScore is frozen…
Usually they get used to it after a few uses though.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I follow the revised Mittman Rule - “4 of a minor is always Forcing in Non Competitive Constructive auctions”.
July 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I had the Ace of Hearts as in the first scenario I would want to be in 3NT
With the current Hearts I would prefer the auction given above.
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I much rather be in 3NT than 4 or 5
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For North, and E/W contract rolled back to 4H.
South gets to keep -3400 (unless can convince me that s/he pulled the XX by mistake while intending to Pass).
If only that was Legal…
June 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Out of curiosity… how do you show a hand with 1 card disparity such as 5=6?

I think your are confusing this with a hand that would have opened 1, where the “2 card disparity” makes more sense
June 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this depends mostly on the level of the novice partner.
If its a true novice, who makes many random bids and make up bids that fits the hand s/he currently hold, then the Pro has no way of knowing how many spades they have and does not need to alert.

If otoh its not a true “Novice” but an advancing player who could be relied upon, and you believe that they indeed had the agreement that the 3 bid was showing shortness, as opposed to a strong fragment (and by inference worry about the other major), then the Pro should have alerted it.
June 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
These questions cannot be answered without knowing the framework of your bidding system.
In some partnerships we play 1m - 2M shows both Majors with equal or longer spades with 2 = Less then Inv & 2 = Inv.
In other partnerships we play Soloway style Strong Jump Shifts.
in other partnerships we play 1m - 2M as Natural and Weak.
Yet in other partnerships we play 1m - 2M as a Fit Showing Jump Shift
There are other sequences that may also effect the answers to your Q1 and Q2, like whether your partnership allows for a 1NT rebid with a singleton Spade for example.
The answer to your Q1 & Q2 differs greatly for different frameworks.
Obviously the leading responses at this point (Natural and Non Forcing) makes absolutely no sense if you play 1m - 2M would have shown that type of hand…
June 13
.

Bottom Home Top