Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Chris Sloan
1 2 3 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit, just making sure I understand what you are saying:

1NT-2; 2-2 is invitational with 4 spades and a longer minor

1NT-2; 2-3 is a invitational with 5 or more spades

Is that correct?
Aug. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a matter of corporate law, the Chairman of the Board has no legal authority to act on behalf of a corporation other than to preside over board meetings.
Aug. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ken's description is a little off. Leaving aside the shareholders (or members in some non-profits), the board of directors would be at the top. The chairman is just the individual who is tasked with leading that body. In a really large company (to use Ken's example), there would then be a CEO AND a President (who reports to the CEO), and then various other C-suite members, including COO, CFO, CIO, CTO, etc. In smaller companies, the CEO and President are often the same individual.
Aug. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I want to like that quote about one hundred times. That's what got me hooked (and I'm “young” by bridge standards at 44) and also what got my logic-puzzle-loving wife hooked.
June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems to me that part of the issue is whether 4 constitutes “a very unusual or unexpected meaning.” How does one determine this? I had a discussion with an opponent recently who played a non-jump cuebid of our suit at the 3-level as a splinter bid, instead of a Western Cuebid, and was adamant that it was not alertable because it was a cuebid. That certainly was a “very unusual or unexpected meaning” to me, but the DIC did not agree, to my surprise.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me this looks like West is shooting an angle. He got no misinformation that I can see. South either discouraged in diamonds, or gave count depending on their agreement in this situation. West decided to gamble on making an overtrick, costing him a cold contract. Now he is trying to get it back by complaining about something specious.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just arrived and I can also confirm that Uber and Lyft are both readily available for airport pickup. For us it was $24 to the hotel.
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit is right. I am still relatively “young” by bridge standards (44), and I was playing poker a long time before bridge. Poker is a game of tactical aggression. Bridge is no different. Competitive bridge is a bidder's game. I realized that early on, and that's why my main partner and I switched to precision quickly, because precision allows for the most aggressive bidding tactics more effectively than standard or 2/1. Every time we open ahead of the opponents, we have an advantage, so we find lots of reasons to open or preempt instead of finding reasons not to. Do we eat a double every now and then? Sure. But we get way more good boards than bad with this approach.

Lastly, it's a hell of a lot more fun to bid than pass.

I suspect all of these reasons are why younger players bid more aggressively.
Jan. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
LHO has the A. I didn't know that when I played on spades, though maybe I should have tried to figure that out first.
Nov. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I played small to the A (nothing exciting happened) and small back to my hand, RHO showing out and now I have to lose three spade tricks. What I'm trying to figure out is if there's a (non-results-oriented) reason to do something like lead the Q, or finesse the 8 on the first round of spades. Either will hold my spade losers to two on the actual layout, which would have allowed me to make (based on the rest of the defense). If you assume that you can get rid of both heart losers somehow, then you can afford to lose two spades but not three. It seems to me that you never have an issue with the spades splitting 3-2, and if you're getting a 4-1 split, it's going to be with LHO, so that's why I'm wondering if leading the Q is best.
Nov. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming a 15-17 NT, when it then is passed twice, the balancing seat knows that opponents have less than 24 points, give or take. From that he knows about how many points his partner has. So, I guess I'm having trouble understanding why the hesitation is an issue. In that particular auction, I'm bidding with any 5-5 hand whether my partner insta passes or tanks for an hour.
Aug. 7, 2017
Chris Sloan edited this comment Aug. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My partner and I play that a raise to 2NT shows a balanced 15-16 (our NT rebid would show 14-16) with four of partner's major, and jumping to 3M shows an unbalanced hand with four of partner's major and 16-18 dummy points.

I'm sure it's not ideal, but it has worked fairly well for us in untangling the situation raised by OP.
June 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This pair plays fairly-basic Standard American methods. As I understand it, they would open this hand the same way in 1st or 2nd seat.
March 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my case, it was my LHO who opened 4. Nothing was mentioned about the bid. It didn't really make any difference to us at the table, but I was very surprised by the strength of her hand, and that's why I am asking about the rules.
March 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am missing something. It looks like all you have to do to make 12 tricks is cash one club to make sure they run, unblock spades, go to your hand with a heart, lead the J to knock out the Q, and claim 12 tricks. What am I missing? Or are we just trying to maximize the chance for the overtrick?
March 1, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I, for one, need to be reminded from time to time to pause before I pull the trigger.”

You and me both. Live and learn.
Feb. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This happened to my team at the Atlanta regional this past year. We were up around 60 imps at the half in the final round with 12 boards to go. They had a long drive ahead and told us they wanted to concede. We were fine with it because it allowed us to get to the bar sooner. ;)
Feb. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This Chris now agrees with parallel Chris. Thanks for the explanation, John.
Feb. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, if I had stayed silent, wouldn't I be much more clearly protected? If North accepts the transfer, he's taking advantage of UI (the knowledge that his partner didn't alert 1NT and thus likely forgot Mathe) and the lack of an announcement of 2H deprived me of the ability to double for lead direction. Seems to me that the rectification is much more obvious and with the same likely outcome.

As an aside, I'm somewhat sympathetic to North's problem of how to answer my question. I think, in review, he should have said “2H is natural in this auction” or something to that effect, but I'm not sure I could have figured out to be that careful were I in his spot. Now, arguably, with his multiple tens of thousands of masterpoints, maye he should have known, but I do see that he has to be extremely careful with his answer.
Feb. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
POSTSCRIPT: Thanks for all the informative comments. At the time, the director awarded Av+/Av-, but after further consideration he adjusted the score to E-W +200. The main thing I learned through this process is that, under these circumstances, I would have been in a much safer spot had I just remained silent until the auction was over.
Feb. 20, 2017
1 2 3 4
.

Bottom Home Top