Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bill March
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Though this certainly seems like the same hand it must have been either opened out of turn at one of our tables or the cards were in the wrong hands !
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Henrik - I’m getting confused, I mean the one about making a bid sufficient(if natural)or partner is barred,was that a different law?
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just go back to the previous law.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is the same hand, The actual ruling is not stated above.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Having previously been castigated for making up English words and now Latin, I'll try Greek Επόμεν
Nov. 18
Bill March edited this comment Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's all true but I think David's point is that in a normal ‘stepping stone’ variation there is usually only one winner accessed not 3!
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Which takes us into the realm of ‘protecting’ yourself(passim,ad nauseum)
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You cash Dk and play H then dummy takes last 3 tricks
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
James - and cassettes are making a comeback!
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There was no misunderstanding - the double by agreement was meant and taken as take out of clubs, but was not alerted(as it should have been in EBU).
After 4H was passed out and went 2 off this hand claimed that they would have doubled if told the double was takeout of clubs.
They got a partial adjustment and we were told that if we wanted to appeal we had 20 mins to put down a £30 deposit with a warning that we’d lose a VP if it was deemed frivolous ! - I wasn’t happy.
Nov. 17
Bill March edited this comment Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok, if I put in 3 I should have put in 4.
Nov. 17
Bill March edited this comment Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Shows exactly 4(bid to appropriate level with 5)
Nov. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yet again! - maybe the practical answer is that partner had a 3S bid on the first round and miss sorted their hand or forgot their agreements.
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Though Michael Byrne’s article was good he did not have the space (or perhaps the inclination) to fully explore this area.
If you’re going to open 1C with 4144 to ‘find all your fits’ then you need to consider the following (in increasing order of importance)
1) 1C pass 1H pass 1S no longer shows 5 plus clubs.
2) If you do want to find all fits then you need to bid ‘up the line’ - so if partner bids 1D then do you raise and maybe miss a spade fit or bid 1S then have a later problem showing a weak 4144 as opposed to a stronger 4135 etc.
3) 1C (1S) double pass - many play that the double says nothing about diamonds so is 2D now a reverse ?? If not then what do you do with extra values with 5C/4D?, there’s a whole can of worms here.
Nov. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don’t find option 1 ridiculous - KQ AKQJxxxx KQJ void , I see no merit in pass .
Oct. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ambrose - you seem to be a few years behind the times, it’s now de rigueur to take offence on behalf of others.
Oct. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dante would have known where to put those who reveal film and book endings.
Oct. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
SA then CJ
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Possible can of worms re the ‘honesty’ of such descriptions, it could take a long long time to verify.
Oct. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As you can see from the limited responses so far there is no proven ‘optimal’ solution - having 2 majors to worry about and lack of space gives you too much to do.
I’ve been playing this convention for a long time but it doesn’t come up often enough to have seen what’s most effective - I think your own suggested scheme is reasonable but may suffer from the old problem of ‘optional’ doubles over preempt, you need clear rules regarding what’s needed to double and to leave it in.
Oct. 16
.

Bottom Home Top