Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Barry Dehlin
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To the vast majority who have provided constructive help, up to and including critical or even disparaging comments on the BIDS…thank you. My partner and I are not experts, and this is exactly the type of expert feedback we can use.

To the minority who have chosen to use the evidence of one hand to make see-how-smart-I-am characterizations of the BIDDERS as novices of whom their teachers should be ashamed…I am less thankful. Merry Christmas to you.

Now, some specific follow-up questions:

1. Re: suggestions that E (me) should rebid 2H. Does not a sequence such as…

1S-2D
2H-(2N or 3C or 3D)
3S

…suggest more than a minimum? IOW, doesn't FAILING to rebid 2S risk being forced to show a stronger hand later in the auction?

2. Re: suggestions that West's 3S bid should not be made on 2 pieces.

I'm assuming folks noticed that E guaranteed 6 for the 2S rebid. Given that, I thought it was pretty standard to raise here on two for many hand types…anything that does NOT have (4 hearts or 6 diamonds or 4 clubs) AND has at least one stopper-less suit making NT unappealing. What am I missing? If 3S guarantees 3, What would you bid over 2S with Ax xxx AKxxx QJx?

3. Re: my 4N bid.

I'm not disputing that it's a bad bid (that opinion seems the overwhelming consensus), but I don't think I fully get WHY yet. With the 4C cue-bid, partner is starting a sequence where (at least in our methods) the only tools we have remaining are cue-bidding for controls, and RKC with it's follow-ups…or said another way, the only tools we have left are those that try to ensure we don't have two quick losers, and/or possible intermediate trump weakness when missing the SQ. So is he not saying that so long as we HAVE all of those things, we should be in slam? If so, what purpose does bidding a diamond or heart controls serve here. My view was that partner is saying that across from my minimum-but-not-awful opener (else I would have bypassed Non-serious 3N to bid 4S), we should be in slam so long as we don't have two quick losers or trump weakness if missing the SQ. Since I know about the SQ and can find out the rest of that by bidding 4N, what purpose does further cue-bidding serve?

So…what's lacking here: (1) something that we should have in our methods that I'm not getting, (2) my thought process, (3) all of that and more?

4. Using mainstream 2/1 agreements, what would the expert standard approach to this hand be, presumably landing in 4S?





Dec. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I haven't read all of this, so apologies if this is a repeat.

I would like to be able to follow a pair through a full matchpoints session on vugraph, with commentary.
Dec. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actual holdings:

……….K753
……….KQ8
……….7
……….A9832
J962…………..AQ8
T6………………..A97432
632……………..Q9
KQJ5…………..64
……….T4
……….J5
……….AKJT854
……….87

Is there any way to insert the handviewer format in a comment?

(Edited to remove 14th & 15th cards from South hand)
Nov. 25, 2015
Barry Dehlin edited this comment Nov. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While West is inexperienced, East is an experienced Int/Advanced player who actually directs at times and clearly knows about UI.
Nov. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are we worrying a bit too much here? What do we think these probabilities are:

1. Probability that if Polish team had been banned from Chennai that the sponsor would try to withdraw support for Wroclaw.

2. Probability that any existing legal agreements would fail to prevent sponsor from withdrawing support for the Wroclaw championship.

3. Probability that if sponsor succeeds in withdrawing support the Wroclaw championships would not happen.

4. Probability that if Wroclaw championships were canceled that this would somehow threaten “the preservation of bridge.”

I think anyone concerned about this parlay – i.e. that ALL of these things would come true – is overreacting a bit. In my assessment, the risk of all of them coming true is far less concerning than the risk that cheating itself could threaten the preservation of bridge.

Oct. 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
N/S uninterrupted

P 2C
2D 2H (2H is either 5+ hearts or 24+ balanced)
2S 2N (2S relay, 2N 24+ balanced)
3N P
Sept. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I made a bid here my partner thought was off-the-wall. Apparently, he was right.
June 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For those interested in real-life results, this was board 21 here…

http://thecommongame.com/NiteResults/20150428Rank.html
May 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would love to see BW adopt a standard ATB post template (like their templates for bidding problems, lead problems, and other polls) that permits responses along two axes: (1) amount of blame to assign (i.e. from all fate on one extreme to all bad decision(s) on the other), and (2) relative blame between the pair in question.
April 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not the case here. East passed in tempo after appropriate pause.
April 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Appreciate everyone's answers. With the masses, I led the 5…giving declarer a heart trick and failing to cash our 5 spades (partner w/ K9xxx and spades 2-2 with opponents). Lose 12. Right choice, wrong hand.
April 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Except for 4432, that's right.
April 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In what world does East not compete with Michaels? This will happen and will make all of this discussion about both bidding and play moot (guessing the pointed queens becomes quite easy when this happens).
June 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think these issues are so important – and could lead to radically different answers – that I abstained.

Pairs, in balancing seat I'll double if Y=x.

Team, in direct seat I think I need Y=K if all of the spots in the hand are truly low.
May 6, 2014
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think S errs in taking hearts out of the equation (prefer 3 rebid to 3). But even with given rebid, N should just gamble on the spade game when red at IMPs.
May 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems that GIB-bashing (legitimate) easily morphs into GIB-programmer-bashing. Those walking close to (or past) this line haven't shown me that they know anything about programming and whether GIB should be better given the time and resources devoted to it. I don't know anything about programming either, but we should probably try to retain a bit of humility in this regard given the clearly-smart people who have been involved in developing GIB.

April 30, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also, what are your rules or applicable situations for when introducing a new suit is a fit-bid?
April 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You were at our table, although I have to admit that I didn't recognize you at the time. I was North (as rotated), and my partner faced this problem.

Our teammate merely made a 1 overcall, so your teammates had a bit more room to find the better (but also not making, at least w/o defensive help) 6.
April 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You will get the 5 first-round control bid…and then?
April 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Question for all of the 4 bidders…what is your plan following partner's most-likely response of 4?

I THINK our agreements are mainstream in that once the fit is established with 4 all later suit bids are control-showing cues. So you seem to lose the opportunity to either play in a club slam, or to get partner's help in making a slam decision by showing your long suit.

April 8, 2014
Barry Dehlin edited this comment April 8, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top