Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bill March
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 41 42 43 44
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What I’m trying to establish is if a pair is happy to play that they raise to 2 with a six loser 4234 strong NT then what is the worst 3145 shape for which they would do it?
Dec. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good article.
I thought the analysis of bd 134 a bit dubious,yes you may make 4S double dummy but the 5D sacrifice just looks terrible to me.
Dec. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Frances - re your 2nd paragraph, though the advantages of this style are obvious enough re slam bidding and not getting too high when responder is weak I’m not 100% convinced about raising to the 2 level with 3 trumps. When you mention 3145 ‘minimums’ ,how bad do they have to be not to raise?.
Dec. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A very good book which shows just how difficult getting canapé to work properly actually is(despite claims to the contrary). Although the system is ACBL ‘friendly’ it is not easy with many counter intuitive (but logically constructed) sequences.
Dec. 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my youth my favourite partner and I had 2 systems. One(a typical student concoction) had multiple meanings for most bids but it was the other ( that we called ‘supernatural’) which seemed to disconcert the opposition more. Everything was ‘natural’ - no stayman,no cuebids,every double showed length in the suit doubled,definitely random but fun nonetheless.
Dec. 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I once witnessed(outside the playing area) a player harangue a director for over 5 minutes re the events at his table. When the director finally got a word in he was informed(can’t recall the exact words ) ‘it doesn’t matter what you think as I don’t think you’re competent enough to understand the problem ‘!
Dec. 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Frances has summed this up very well - all approaches have their pluses and minuses and you just have to choose the style whose problems you’re most comfortable with - eg your 2nd problem some would say is more a consequence of playing 2 over 1 than weak NT,horses for courses.
Dec. 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I’ve certainly NOT done any analysis but as someone who has read every appeal in the case books my impression was that ‘name’ players get the majority of the verdicts - now the better players are more aware that there is scope for an appeal and in general they will be able to argue their case better but even so I suspect that in close cases their status alone will sometimes tip things in their favour.
Dec. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks - it seems I can now add blindness to deafness!
Dec. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What happened to the post on the appeal?
Dec. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No,the lead is assuming that declarer has only 8 tricks if we defend passively which is not the same thing. Where is the 3H bid that partner didn’t double?
Nov. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well what I think(though the player himself can confirm) is that he was helping his partner in anticipation of 5S over 5H. However opener was on a different wavelength re lead direction/length and thought (wrongly) that with only 5 hearts and 4 clubs it was a better spot. Not to worry, I came to the rescue!
Nov. 21, 2018
Bill March edited this comment Nov. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I’ll be publishing an article later re aspects of this hand - certainly my first thoughts were as to what spade I should lead.
Nov. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Declarer (on my left) was in 6C,my trumps were Q10x, dummy had Kxx.
I’d like to say this was a deliberate Grosvenor with declarer leading a low club to partners J dummy’s K and my 10 but no, the lead was in dummy and the King cashed. I ‘knew’ that declarer would finesse the Jack next so decided to ‘deflect’ him from this by playing the 10 first.
My shock at seeing partners J was brief,declarer couldn’t get this right - I was wrong.
Nov. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard - I remember an impressive hand (from a bidding competition)by the Sharples that was reported many years later.
Opener has a 2434 18 count and responder a 4432 13 count - the heart suit being being something like Jxxx opp 109xx.
Their simple auction (following the principle of not bidding bad suits with good hands) was
1C 1S 2NT(17/18) 3NT.
Nov. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ken/Nikos - my apologies, I know my percentages but had an aberration and was thinking of a
4 - 0 split. I would have been better off making the general point that people often talk about 50/50 slams and not considering the small(but not insignificant ) chance of a very bad trump split.
Oct. 31, 2018
Bill March edited this comment Oct. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nigel Kearny has said most of it but since there are still very confused postings I'll have a go.
Acol has many weaknesses but this hand isn't one of them. If playing 12-14 NT then 2C is the system bid as is a 2H rebid by South(though 2D didn't cost on this hand).
North's 2S bid is IMO completely obvious. South's pass could be right at pairs but it's a massive view.
Oct. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It may be that friendly leads make this better than 50% in practise yet there seems to be no acknowledgement so far that there is a 5% chance of a trump loser.
Oct. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At this vul I’d expect a majority for a 1S opener with a small diamond , perhaps that should be the next poll.
Oct. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I should have abstained,has this been posted to settle a bet of some sort?
Oct. 25, 2018
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 41 42 43 44
.

Bottom Home Top