Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bill Segraves
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 22 23 24 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“we are wasting everyone's time”

Amen! It's in everyone's best interest for players to claim when they can claim.
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seemed like enough questions just asking minors. Ask away if you think it'd be a different answer for spades and are curious.
Dec. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play that 2NT as puppet to 3 with some partners and as balanced invite with others, but it's been my impression that the majority of those who play XYZ consider the former to be the “standard” version. It'd be interesting to see a poll.
Dec. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am attracted to the idea of balanced hand lacking spade stopper, but what is opener to do if also lacking a spade stop on something like 3=4=2=4, 3=4=3=3 or 2=4=3=4 shape? Or did some or all of those hands already rebid 1NT despite lacking the spade stop?
Dec. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rofl. If that's a good 5 card major, what's a bad one?
Dec. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I simmed it, and under the specified conditions, the strong hand was about twice as common as weak 5-5. (That's without any specs to keep the opps silent.)
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So what would happen on 1=5=2=5 opposite 5=1=4=3, both minimum?
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am under no illusion that Gazzilli is without its problem hands (I keep a list of them). I'm just looking for the best solution to this one.

IMO, there are significant downsides to suppressing the 5th spade. A spade game could even be missed if opener decides to go quietly with good support. But I don't like the idea of playing in the 5-1.

Unfortunately, I can't see a way to have it both ways: able to shape out on weak hands but also able to show the strong hand below 3NT.

As I think about this more, I was at first comforted a bit by a potential frequency argument for passing 2 rather than bidding out the 5-5. Playing in 2 means that we have an opener who's 11-13 or 14 (depending on club suit quality) opposite a <8 responder. The opps have to have stayed out of the auction despite holding ~ half the points. There's a decent chance they would have gotten in, especially if they were first to call, but after our 1 start, it might just have been hard for them to get in the diamonds. May have to run some sims to get a frequency on weak 5-5 vs strong with clubs.
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Julien, I'm not sure I'm seeing how that necessarily helps. On this auction, our 2 is either strong or 5 and 4+. Will your responder bid 2 after 2 with 5=1=4=3, for instance, or will responder bid 3? (If the latter, our responder could do the same). That seems to give up on spades in preference for what will usually be 4-3 clubs.

Also, after 2 showing either strong or 6, what does opener do if responder rebids ? Does 3 then show minimum with 6 or strong with 6?
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So what next after 2 2? Does 3 show a strong hand or just patterning out the 5-5?
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That means playing in a 5-1 spade fit instead of 5-3 club fit when something like 1=5=2=5 opposite 5=1=4=3?
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 shows <8 hcp, <2 hearts, 5+ spades, not 4 clubs if only 5 spades.
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So what do you bid with 18-19 balanced?
Dec. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For Rosalind's, just let Google translate it. It's pretty easy to read after that. Just a few words that don't translate well, and it's pretty easy to reason out what they must mean.
Nov. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm inclined to say WTP, since I really don't care about the semantics (if semi-forcing is so bad, why not do away with the prefix “semi” entirely?). The purpose is to inform and it's at least as informative as “intended as forcing” or “ISOL,” but if people are truly looking to inform more completely, there are potential options. As a starting point, I might propose:

After 1, at least, “forcing unless opener has a balanced minimum.” (It's a little more complicated after 1, depending on Flannery, Kaplan, etc-related issues.)

After either 1M, “forcing unless opener is uninterested in hearing an invite.”

Edit: Various sources for meaning of prefix semi say things like “partially” or “almost.” This may not tell an unfamiliar observer the conditions under which it could be passed, but IMO it is a very good description of the meaning of SF NT as it's generally played.
Nov. 30
Bill Segraves edited this comment Dec. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing MP, there's a lot to be said for methods that will get you to your 8 card M fit, which rates to score better than 1NT. But at at IMPs, I'm content to play 1NT, if permitted to, and to keep the 2 GF response and 2 rebid natural, to facilitate slam bidding.

I don't worry too much about missing thin games with a balanced minimum opener and an unbalanced limit raise responder. The opps are usually in this auction. They have at least a 9 card fit and almost half the points.
Nov. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And do those also show diamond tolerance?
Nov. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm curious as to why those who chose #1 wouldn't possibly want option to X also with more than 4 to allow showing tolerance as well and/or to differentiate NF and strong bids (intending to make another call in spades in either case, if auction indicates that's appropriate). Not presuming there aren't good reasons, just askin.
Nov. 30
Bill Segraves edited this comment Nov. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4+ at 1 level with tolerance in my snapdragon partnerships. Top honor in my Rosenkranz partnerships. Not a hand suitable for a fit jump to 2 in either.
Nov. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Weak or multi, per partner preference.
Nov. 29
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 22 23 24 25
.

Bottom Home Top