Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Benoit Lessard
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 231 232 233 234
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If i pull the wrong card I will noticed it quite quickly, if i revoke because I have a card missorted than I thikn its fair I pay the penalty.

Its a tradeoff I don't want my partner to give UI by showing that he is surprised (or not) that im out. If you play with a regular partner that ask from time to time than often you can make an educated guess on the suit layout.

EX
There is a singleton trump on dummy, you show a trump void and partner say nothing with those partner you can expect 6-6-1/7-5-1 trumps.If partner is really surprised when he ask you can expect 9-1-3 trumps. If he ask without being too surprised than 8-4-1 is likely. When you play with a partner for a long time you notice these small habits.

For me paying a trick penalty once or twice a year is a small price to pay for the ethics im trying to aim when I play bridge.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If my partner got only 4H i expect 10-11 pts.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
playing attitude leads, the 5 from J85 look normal to me. My partner will not expect me to have a 4 card suit anyway and Im not too keen on getting a H switch.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This no ?? partner should be only for players who are not able to keep score. If someone is experienced and healthy enough to keep reliable score than you shouldnt ask.

If I know beyond any doubt that there is a revoke than asking is ok. As an example I consider opening 1NT with a 6 card major to be possible and im willing to suffer UI rules if opener open 1NT with 7M and asking kind of exposed that opener psyched.
Sept. 17
Benoit Lessard edited this comment Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that COG bids are very important, I prefer to scrap Wolff signoff than to be forecd to bid 3S with south hand.


I like to play

2NT-3D-3H-3S as a trump ask so that
2NT-3D-3H-3NT is showing 5H but 5332 allowing opener to pass with 3 trumps.

1NT-2D-2H-2S as asking for 3 trumps & min/max
1NT-2D-2H-3NT suggest (5332) & allow opener to pass with 3 trumps.

1Y-1M-1NT-2C-2D-3NT as 5M322 and again allowing opener to pass with 3 trumps.

As for 2Nt rebid there is a lot of different system and its hard to know what is best but now I prefer to have no ways to stop in 3Y and I have never regretted it since my switch, being to be able to bid the best game and best slam turn out to be more profitable than the cases where 3Y is your last plus. (Note that i play 2M as wjs over 1m) So hands that want to stop in 3M are usually wjs anyway.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Our preempts are greatly defined by both VUL and position (Cohen-Bergen notes) but even in first seat our style is a “boring” 5-10 nearly always 6.

We don't open 1M with all 11.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
X is clear for me.

If partner got values we would often endup in 3NT anyway (for better and for worse). If we reach 4H after my X than I expect 4H to be better or as good as 3Nt.

If partner doesnt have values than 3Y rate to be significantly better than 2Nt. Unless partner is 4333,3433.

If you play xfer lebensohl you may have a problem when partner bid 2NT with clubs and some values (there is no club INV in xfer leb, but doubler can super accept by bidding 3D). I dont think my hand is good enough to bid 3D over 2NT (xfer leb)
Sept. 14
Benoit Lessard edited this comment Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North cannot cash the K it will sell south shape as 2551. Defense best chances is to give the impression that south is 1552 with stiff A.
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok now i understand why Roger line is better, he will never blank the K of .
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I dont know the bot but i assume that xx,AQJT,Qx,Kxxxx is an overcall, wich mean the finesse against east will only lose (compared to cashing and squeeze line) when west got Qx in wich is less likely than him having xx(xx).
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After knowing the majors layout you know that if west got the K he will never have the Q (failure to X or to overcall 2C) so simply playing for east to have the Q look better.
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think whats is important is that either a direct 1NT or a delayed X (of 1NT,2Y) should show a big bal hand (around 16-19). What is inefficient is to play both

(1m)—(1Y)—-1Nt
(1m)—(1Y)—(1NT)—P—(P)—X
as takeout.

I like
X = takeout M is equal or longer than the minor
1NT= 5m+4M or 5-5 but can be weaker.
pass and X = strong NT.

Usually when we are vul or when they are vul I prefer to X 1nt than bid 1NT and possibly get X. However you can argue that its quite easy to runout from 1NTx and sometimes opener raise to 2M or repeat his suit than X with a strong NT might be akward.

Another problem is that more and more players play xfers or 1m that can be short, so 1Nt semi-natural might be better
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ive been playing a weak Nt (12-14 any vul) for a long time and here is for me stuff that rarely/never happen.

Successful preemptive 3 level bids.

1- you need to be unpassed hand or you have clubs not quite good enough for 3C opening
2- 3Y is safe enough but game is unlikely
3- they dont bid.
4- it doesnt cost by wrongsiding.

5-5 in both minors weakish just never happen (now we xfer to 2D with those anyway)

So if your unpassed hand just play strong NT structure (3M for 3145)
if your a passed hand it doesnt matter that much what you play but I guess 2NT as inv is pointless with a 11-13 range.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1/3 is the magic number.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“The result of a finesse is determined when the cards are dealt: nothing can change it.”

totally right

85 KQ = 6.8%
Q85 K = 6.2%
K85 Q = 6.2%

“So to play for the drop is the percentage play!” lol


What RC theory is trying to show but often failed with less experienced players is that when defender have a random choice between one card or another, the fact that defender got a decision to make is important compared to cases where he doesnt have a decision to make.

Or a simpler way to see it is that those cards are equivalent. If you see the K & Q as equivalent cards

85 HH = 6.8%
H85 H = 12.4%

Finesse is right.

If you see K & Q as different card (meaning defender need to choose between one and another)

85—–KQ x 50% def choose to play the K = 3.4%
Q85—-K x 100% of case where he is forced to play the K = 6.2%

85—–KQ But Q is played = 3.4%
K85—-Q = 6.2%

Finesse is right again.
Sept. 10
Benoit Lessard edited this comment Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“If this is their agreement, then 3♠ is an impossible bid, and responder does not have an ethical problem concluding that partner is not on the same wavelength.”

Strongly disagree.


“B” students who just learned lebensohl.

1NT–(2H)–2NT–(P)
3D—ap

2Nt was alerted and explained as “forcing me to bid 3C” ask why the 3D bid “my clubs are so good that I knew that my partner would have diamonds, but if my partner got clubs we will be ok in 4C anyway”

IMO only a poor director would rule 3S an impossible bid, if your partner correctly & confidently explained 2NT as could be weak with clubs you would be pretty confident too that 3S showed some clubs.

In others similar cases directors should be careful of self serving statement like “in our system this bid doesnt exist so I would have know that we had a misunderstanding and its not UI anymore”.
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming that you have an agreement that 3C is + club tolerance is it alertable ?
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So if your agreements is that 3S show 5S and a club tolerance than its probably alertable (and it should wake up your partner), if it show a club super accept its alertable.
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
http://www.ecatsbridge.com/Documents/files/WBFInformation/Reports_Minutes/LawsCommitteeMinutes/2008-Beijing.pdf

Law 20 F4.

If a player subsequently realizes that his own explanation was erroneous or incomplete he must call the Director immediately. The Director applies Law 21B or Law 40B4.

So the mechanism is this you always give what you think is the the “partnership understanding” even if this contradict partenr previous MI or exposed the misbid/MI, as soon as one player realized he gave a MI he need to call the director immediatly.
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If your agreements are that 2S is range check and that 3S is a super accept than 3S is alertable so you alert and this should wake up partner and he may immediatly call director. Of course if you don't have clear agreement about 3S than you are still in the grey zone. That is the circa 2007/2008 rule clarification that was done. im still trying to find the wbf notes about this.
Sept. 7
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 231 232 233 234
.

Bottom Home Top