Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bill March
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As an indication of the strong feelings that still linger here in the UK on this matter consider this. A few years ago there was an innocuous editorial comment in the EBU magazine to the effect that the resolution of the R/S affair was unsatisfactory. Low and behold a month later(after obviously been leant on by persons unknown)a ‘retraction’ was published stating that the matter was satisfactorily resolved by the clearing of R/S by the Foster report!
I pointed out to the editor that subsequent to the ‘not guilty’ verdict the WBF unanimously reaffirmed the original ‘guilty’ decision. Indeed the only problem with describing this as ‘unsatisfactory’ was that it was an understatement. Needless to say this observation was not published.
April 2, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had always thought that the reason players(not me) preferred std remaining count(irrespective of what count they normally give)is that it is the same card they would lead back - eg you make a discouraging discard from 3 low, then when you're on lead you return the higher card,etc etc.
March 21, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play weak NT but still prefer 2NT to be NF here - say LHO has bid your 2nd suit e.g AQxx x Qxxxx KJx .
I'd rather have the problem of leaping to 3NT on a balanced 15/16 than having to bid 3D(or 3C?)on this hand.
Feb. 28, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
and if as responder you have 3S and 5H?
Feb. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
and if as responder you have 3S and 5H ?
Feb. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
and if as responder you have 3 spades & 5 Hearts?
Feb. 14, 2014
Bill March edited this comment Feb. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And others that 2D may include a raise to 2nt,that 3D is a mixed raise(4 card support 7-9 points),that 2nt is 4 card support 10+ and therefore 2S is natural.
Feb. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Kit - This is further confirmation for me that there is no consensus on this.I like the idea of delayed bids showing invit + with Diamonds,that would never have occurred to me.Do you (as Dean) play the delayed double as T/out, there are some who think this is what you do with a traditional redouble and is therefore for penalties.
Feb. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The difference is that you can raise 1H/S to two with a wide range of weak(?)hands,an option that doesn't exist playing forcing minors.
As Bob say's all systems have holes. In one of my partnerships I play Acol without forcing minor raises and encounter the exact problems alluded to above, but for example if I hold a 2344 shape and 5 to 9 points I(personally)am a lot happier raising to 2D rather than bidding 1NT,and what if my shape is 1345? Those playing 3D as pre-emptive can't cover everything.
I'm not knocking forcing minor raises, they are an improvement on ‘old fashioned’ but there are very few conventions that come without cost.
Jan. 15, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The most consistent thing in all these cases is the sheer lack of ‘the evidence is in the hands ’ material. The FZ affair in 75 seemed to feature no suspicious hands(though the visual evidence was overwhelming)
Going back to Reese/Shapiro, the ‘most incriminating’ hand featured a lack of ethics(backed up with self serving statements)that to modern eyes seems scarcely believable, yet in my opinion it didn't support the charge unless you thought neither player had a brain cell between them.
Dec. 27, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So,we know LHO to be a good player therefore assume they won't make a bad bid - but partner isn't so good and won't realise the wool is being pulled over their eyes. This all seems plausible(albeit insulting) when partner explains why they removed my in tempo double - but after a slow double? self serving comes to mind.
Dec. 13, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My problem with the merit of the appeal on #4 is the assertion that if a good player bids 2S then 4S then they ‘must’ be sandbagging rather than misbidding. Haven't we seen enough mistakes by even the greatest players to reject this argument out of hand.
Dec. 10, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The easier bidding for the opponents in transfer auctions(not just after 1NT)is often not taken into consideration.
Nov. 26, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit - very good article, can I clarify, is an immediate 2S a strong T/O. What is your approach with a strong balanced hand if the oppo's are playing weak or mini NT?
Nov. 11, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you play 2 over 1 the wide range of the 1NT response will create problem hands where you can't handle everything. All of the methods proposed above have a (different) gap - so yes agree on some ‘science’ that leaves unbiddable the hands you lose least sleep about(eg being able to play in 2nt)
Nov. 1, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Karen - I think there is a gulf between us that cannot be bridged, I do not agree that the majority of blunders occur for the reasons you describe(though obviously they play a part)
My point about the reporting is not that more blunders should be highlighted but that as things are a casual reader can't help but get a slightly misleading impression of what goes on.
I can't remember the great Bob Hamman's exact quote but it's to the effect of ‘we’re all terrible, just some aren't quite so bad '
Oct. 31, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Completely disagree with the latter part of Karen's post. I follow all the major competitions and the majority of swings are down to poor bids and poor plays - they tend to get under reported as there's usually more interest in ‘flair’ actions(when successful)
Oct. 30, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT as 7+ and a 4 card raise I think is an idea of Ron Klinger to free up the Bergen raises for other things(though it didn't have the compulsory 3C).
I play this in a precision club context and also find it works very well.
Oct. 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would agree with take out if 1D were precision or even ‘better minor’ but in this context where I presume that 1D is either 5 or a 4441 then I think 3 spades and 9/11 points is higher frequency.
Oct. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Consider this(uninterrupted) auction.
1S 2D 2S 3H 3NT 4H as far as I'm concerned this is forcing to 4NT since it would be crazy to leave it in with a doubleton(responder can't know you have 3 card support)so you can't pass if you have support.
I'd apply same principle to sequence above.
Oct. 14, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top