Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Craig Biddle
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 153 154 155 156
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Melanie, why should you feel guilty about having played in a 0-6K GNT's with a WC medal to your name, when the ACBL routinely lets top foreign players play in MP limited events if they choose to?
43 minutes ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There were eventualities. He was behind on time. As I said in the post, the deal would be in the first 25% of hands in a book aimed at improving I/N declarer play.

Both opponents surely knew that the hand was cold if declarer won the next trump trick in the proper hand. Both opponents knew that anyone playing the 2nd day of the BRP would know which was the correct hand. Both opponents knew that WC2 had defended badly.

Yet, when declarer simply stated that he was going to draw the last trump, WC1 immediately made an invalid claim, knowing that CP1 would possibly be flustered enough to accept it.

Is that what bridge has become? If so, I regret having expended tens of thousands of hours playing, discussing, studying, and promoting the game. But I am still enough of a pie-eyed optimist to believe that most people in this community think as I do, that WC1 was out of line.
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All that is true. But does the opponent putting cards back in the board constitute a concession that does bind partner unless they object in a timely fashion? And if so, define timely? And if not, then is replacing your cards in the board while commingling them with your played cards an act worthy of being warned/censured/penalized (pick one or more)?
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And of course no other possible use of the 2NT response would ever allow partner to show or deny any enthusiasm whatsoever about his hand.
6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dave's point was that partner is not a lock to have a pitch for the 4th, not that it didn't exist on the actual layout.
6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@MikeM if responder has interest in a diamond slam, then

A - he has a 4-card major as well. If he fits doubler's major, won't he have slam interest in that major too? And if he doesn't fit doubler's major he can bid 3 himself.

B - he has no 4-card major. He's going to bid 3 then anyway.

So many people get bad results because they subvert good bidding principles to their desire to declare rather than be dummy. Case in point - I see many club players respond 1 to 1m with 4-4 majors so they can declare either major if a fit exists. These same people then bid 2 next on air, and wonder why they are too high in a 4-3 fit.
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why is a diamond ruff such a bad plan? If I win the lead in hand and lead a diamond, they are pretty much forced to lead a 2nd trump. I lead another diamond, and voila, a diamond ruff appears.

I don't think that's the best line, though. I think going after clubs is right. When spades are 3-2, not only do we make on 3-3 (36%) but also when the J is doubleton (16%) since ducking the A twice is not a possible defense. And the Jx line might survive 4-1 spades on my left, too, since they won't be able to signal anything meaningful with the Jx, and might guess to shift to hearts. This would be playing me for a high honor in each red suit, and seems more likely than 2 in one and none in the other.

Playing on hearts seems like the best line for 9 tricks, but we are in game. I don't see how to extend our limited resources to 10 tricks if I start hearts immediately. Even if I catch Qxx in West, They now can lead trumps twice after winning their two diamond tops, and I still have a diamond and a club in hand to lose.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Preempt RKC. Seems clear; partner has preempted, and we play 4 over preempts as RKC in the general case. I obviously can't ask for keys if I don't know what trump is.
Dec. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Slam is usually not good off an ace and a king. And with 30 HCP and no shortness, this seems like an outlier case.
Dec. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once I've knocked out the A and nobody has played a club:

A. W won the A - I no longer fear a club ruff, and will pass any spade from dummy if not covered.

B. E won the A and played another diamond. The J is a dicey card for me, I will probably run this to the K, pitching my heart, and lead the 10. when RHO (inevitably, since if he couldn't do this there would be no problem) follows small, I will consider:

If spades are 4-1, I might as well take the deep finesse, since it guarantees the contract when E has a stiff spade, or W the stiff King.

If spades are 3-2 and E has a stiff club, the deep finesse goes -1 if E has xx (3 cases), makes 4 on the nose if E has Jx, Kx, Jxx, or Kxx (12 cases) and makes 5 if E has KJx (3 cases). So it's a pick'em. But when clubs are 2-2 (10 9 opposite J 8 or 10 8 opposite J9) we can't go down by double finessing.

So the double finesse is the way to go, losing on balance only to those who play to the Ace and catch a stiff honor behind.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Count me in too. “Knock out their Aces!” The battle cry of the USBF Junior program.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When someone passes a bid that they have explained as forcing, the next hand is required to reopen, typically with a double. 2X-7 is 1700, more than adequate compensation for the slam. And when North runs, E can now bid hearts naturally.

And if South bids, say, 2 (why didn't she, by the way?) and North passes (she surely would), East's double is now cards and hearts.

This was basic tactics back when I was young and everyone psyched over 1 banana-(X) or over partner's weak 2. I suspect that South passed here because her hand was so very mini.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At least he gets a blanket now.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would rule against the Chimp on general principles; I doubt that he could have imagined the winning layout and ending without his wire.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Oh, blindness. There IS an entry-shifting squeeze. West was dealt 0=1=6=6 with no card above a Jack. Win the heart in dummy, UNBLOCKING the 10, then lead the 10 and pass it if not covered. Next, lead a heart spot for the finesse, then play a spade to the jack. Then cash the A and lead the K in the 8-card ending. West must come down to 3 cards in a minor; if that minor is clubs let the K hold, crossruff two of each minor, and your clubs are up.

If West comes down to 3 diamonds, overtake the K and set up diamonds similarly.

And if East covers the 10, you win in hand, cash the J, ruff a club to dummy, and pass the 9. If East covers, play a heart to dummy, ruff a diamond, and lead the 9 to force West to come down to 5 cards in the minors. And then win that trump trick in the hand with the minor that West has unguarded.

If East ducks the 9, you ruff a diamond, cash the A, and once again lead your highest spade, overtaking if West unguards diamonds and holding the lead in hand if West unguards clubs.
Dec. 8
Craig Biddle edited this comment Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see the way to do this. An entry-shifting squeeze seems the best bet, but we would need a 4th side winner to squeeze West down to 7 cards. And we would need 2-1 trumps, which seems contraindicated by Holmes' remark about the lack of a trump lead.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We rate to be able to eliminate spades without losing a spade trick - the only time that won't work is if East has led from xxx(x). If that's the case, and trumps break 3-2, we would be really unlucky to go down.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, but in the 80's the ACBL did enforce the CC regulations.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As noted below, there is a simple solution to the Fantoni problem. DON'T WATCH. That way your sensibilities are not offended, and my belief that open platforms should remain open is not offended either.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If pass is wrong, you may lose a partner. If bidding 4 is wrong, you will likely push the board.
Dec. 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 153 154 155 156
.

Bottom Home Top