Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Craig Zastera
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, I think it is “set in stone” that the negative double promises four s playing standard methods.
On that topic, Bridge World Standard says:
"Negative doubles:
A negative double at the one-level or when there is
exactly one unbid major guarantees at least four
cards in any unbid major (opener may rebid in a
three-card suit there in a pinch);
A negative double of 1 shows exactly four spades
[then: opener's 1 rebid shows a hand with three
spades too weak to raise a noncompetitive 1
response to two;
Opener's 2 rebid shows four spades and a hand worth
a possibly-minimum raise of a noncompetitive 1
response to two];"
Oct. 13
Craig Zastera edited this comment Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously advancer can't hold 5 s or he would have shown them last round.

It seems equally obvious that bidding 2 now with only 4 can only make sense if advancer has a second place to play, almost certainly a 5 card suit.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bridge World Standard says:
"Jumps:

(a) the default interpretation of an otherwise
undefined bid one level above a strength-showing
force (e.g. 1 - 1 - 1 - 3) is a splinter;

(b) the default interpretation of a bid one level
above a splinter (e.g., 1-5) is
Exclusion Key-Card Blackwood."

Thus, in OP auction for opener's second bid, I would conclude
that these rules indicate:
(a) 2 would be a “strength-showing force”
(b) (therefore) 3 would be a splinter
© (therefore) 4 would be Exclusion key-card
(for –responder's implied suit)

Given that, I would think that 4 (Exclusion) at opener's second turn would be ideal.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not believe that it is playable for a negative double after 1-(2) to guarantee 4+ cards in both majors.

There are too many hands with less than this ideal shape where passing (2) is unappealing.

In our partnerships we play “negative freebids” over this specific auction. *That* agreement reduces the need to make “off-shape” negative doubles, but still does not entirely eliminate it. With NFBs, though, we have agreed that a negative double that is not a GF with a 5+ card major must deliver at least 3 card support for both majors.
Without NFBs, I'm not sure one can enforce even that reduced requirement for responder's major suit lengths promised by a negative double.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My point is that one is supposed to alert *agreements*.

If N/S have an agreement that 1N response shows 12-14 and no agreement about a modification of that range for PH, then I do not see why it would be appropriate to alert and explain some ad hoc speculation about what this PH 1NT means.

At best, South perhaps should alert and explain 1NT response as “agreed to show 12-14, but as we have not discussed the PH responder case, you and I are on our own to guess what responder holds here.”
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If their agreement is that 1NT response shows 12-14 and they do not have an agreement about an alternative range for a passed hand (which is what OP said South believed), then I do not see anything wrong with OP South's explanation.

This is particularly true since apparently this North sometimes passes 12 HCP hands (as do I, but then I don't play Precision).

So I would suppose that a reasonable “bridge conclusion” would be that the range is 12-14, and since passing a 13-14 HCP hand is very unlikely, that North likely has 12 that he didn't feel he should open.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another good problem, Leonard.

I chose “PASS”. Happy to see that was fairly popular but I was surprised that the other popular choice was 2.
Yuck.
If I weren't going to pass with this hand, I'd like both 1NT and DOUBLE better than 2.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that rebidding 1NT with a singleton in partner's major (particularly a small singleton) compromises bidding far more than the other alternatives you suggest.

I want my partner to pull my 1NT rebid to 2M almost always with a weak hand and a 5 card suit. Confidence that I will have 2-3 cards in his suit allows him to do that.

I have no problem at all in raising partner's 1M response with 3 card support and either a stiff or a weak doubleton elsewhere.

Conversely, I rarely have a problem with 1-1M-2 with “4/5 either way” in the minors, even though IN THEORY one might worry about reaching 2 in a 4-2. My partners know not to preference back to 2 with 2=3 minors and a weak hand. So I play some 4-3 2 when I might have played a 5-2 2. Good declarer play practice.
Of course, sometimes (e.g. OP hand), I will open 1 and rebid 2 with a strong 5 card suit when the s are not too strong.

BTW, I do not agree with your idea that each partnership must adopt one strategy or another and follow it consistently. What you call “winging it at the table”, I call “exercising good bidding judgment.”
Oct. 12
Craig Zastera edited this comment Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems pretty easy to open 1 then reverse into s (at whatever level necessary).
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner bid 2 freely, so no worries that he was forced to bid a 3 card suit or has a “Yarb.”

So we raise now to confirm our four card support (LOTT suggests competing 3 over 2 with an 8 card fit) and (slightly) more than minimum TO double strength (I would still have doubled if e.g. the Q were a smaller ).
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Needing to open 1 on four doesn't occur too often. I can't say that it has resulted in bad results from playing 4=2 fits, but my sample size is small.

However, I think that a habit of rebidding 1NT with a (small) singleton in partner's major would have a devestating adverse effect on our bidding.

We nearly always rebid 2M with 5 (after opener's 1NT rebid), and generally get excellent results from doing so. Thus, I would not want to adopt a style that would discourage partner from rebidding this way for fear of playing a 5=1 fit.
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would have avoided this problem by opening 1.
Now, I'm stuck with an extremely distasteful (to me anyway) 1NT rebid as I've left myself with no alternative.

BTW, I even regard 1 then 2 as a much better alternative for those who can't handle the occasional 1 opening on a 4 card suit.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass, but change to 973-QJ93-7643-Q5 and I would double (1).
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 then 2: first choice
1N: 2nd choice

I wouldn't consider 1 then 2 as this suit is not close to good enough for that. Should show 6, but a very good 5 will do in a pinch. KT97x is not that.

Also would not consider 1 then 1NT as that is supposed to show 12-14 HCPs, balanced.
This hand is perfect except that it doesn't have 12-14 HCPs and it is not balanced.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4   P   P   DBL
P 5 P 6
P ??

where 6 shows A, 1st round control, and a hand generally good enough to entertain grand slam aspirations opposite a good hand consistent with passing (4).

Now, advancer has a close choice between 6 and 7 as it does not seem unreasonable to hope to find partner with KQxx-Kxxx-AKxx-A, but hardly a sure thing.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems to me like just the right sort of hand for a 3NT overcall.
At least that was what I told my partner the other day after he had chosen that call with a 4333 19 count.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously a good guess is needed.

But I do not like 5 (presumably natural and passable) as that is too likely to turn a plus (5 making) into a minus (5 -1) when partner is weak but with very long s and short s (certainly a likely possibility IMO).
Say he has: Qxxx-x-x-QJTxxxx or some such.

So I see this as between a cautious pass and pushing on to slam (perhaps a grand?).

One could just raise to 6, but since a grand must be possible, I think 5 is best if choosing to move forward.
If partner produces 5, then 7 for me, else 6.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Donald,
Nothing fancy–just similar to what we play over other opener's reverse sequences.

2NT rebid by responder is Lebensohl and is used with hands too weak to force to game.

Opener accepts the relay with 3 unless he is too strong and/or shapely to be willing to play 3 when responder has a weak hand with long s.
Over opener's 3, responder can pass or bid 3/3/3 as offers to play that contract.

Responder's 3 level suit rebids over 2 are (natural and) game-forcing.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 for me, but OP hand is an absolute minimum.
Any less and I'd have to rebid 2 (ugh!).

I would not consider 2NT as for me that shows 18-19 (might stretch with a great 17).
Sept. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, Richard.
Partner had the J. I have edited my previous entry to include all the spot cards.
Sept. 29
.

Bottom Home Top