Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Goldfarb
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steven Mcgrahan: I've seen a lot of people bid that way, but I am still waiting for one of them to miss a slam.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have in fact heard people claim that Precision 1M bids are alertable.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I remember once I was in a competitive auction where we were bidding spades and they were bidding hearts. Partner bid 4NT RKC. I responded showing two key cards without the queen. Ah, too bad, thought partner, We're missing a key and the Q, so slam is not a good bet… Pass.

I managed to scramble four tricks with our various aces and kings, down 7 โ€“ thankfully not vulnerable, and needless to say not doubled.

At the other table, our opposite numbers sold out to 4 and allowed it to make! You know you're having a good round when you win imps on a result like that! (In fact getting a double game swing would not have brought us any more victory points.)
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Law 45.4(b) says, in the latest version of the laws:
Declarer may correct an unintended designation of a card from dummy until he next plays a card from either his own hand or from dummy. A change of designation may be allowed after a slip of the tongue, but not after a loss of concentration or a reconsideration of action.

In other words, you can correct a slip of the tongue, but you can't change your mind. For example, I can remember once, having unblocked the AK of clubs from hand, I crossed to dummy (which had Qxxx left) and said “club”, then without pause for thought said "club queen". The opponents wanted to enforce the first call and make me play a low club, but the director ruled in my favor.

TL;DR: Yes, you could have corrected your slip of the tongue if you were fast enough. Your case wasn't as clear-cut as mine, so you might have wound up arguing with the opponents.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ah, I'm sorry to hear that. I remember teaming up with you two a bunch of times back in the ‘90s. I’ll pass this along to Don V.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
it isn't likely to matter, but you should win the opening lead with the king of spades, not the queen. This may leave West in doubt as to the location of the queen of spades.
Missing the queen, though, mightn't you try putting in the jack at trick 1? So West is not very likely to have much doubt.
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. Correct procedure here would have been to play the hand out at 5S-X, and adjust the score if N-S still felt damaged, which of course they wouldn't.
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin: if you're ever at a tournament I'm at, I'll be happy to let you tether to my iPhone.

(N.B.: Kevin and I are both in Texas, so this is not an idle offer.)
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you had opened 1NT, you probably would have played 2H, which isn't terrible.

My own preference is for 1NT 12-14, opening 5-card majors freely. This allows for 1NT 100% forcing, because the hands that would have passed 1NT semiforcing are removed from the 1M bid. Things are different at the top levels of course: if you open many 10's and most 11's, different problems arise. (My partnerships just pass.)
Sept. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's not clear to me that West's X is or should be “100% penalty”. West showed about 7-10 with the 1NT call, and East knows from his own hand that West can't have a trump stack. The X should indicate a maximum 1NT bid; defending the 8-card fit at the 2-level is almost never going to be right. East should look for his side's 8-card fit.
Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think East should take out the double to 2NT, which ought to be pick-a-minor โ€“ any hand which would actually want to play 2NT would instead leave in the double.
Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I held xx QTxxxxx Kx Kx. The club ace was over the king, but 6 would still have had two losers in the pointed suits. At the other table our teammates sold out to 5, and took the obvious three tricks.
Aug. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was just looking up this hand to show someone, and I note two things:

1) According to Lazard himself, as reported in Tops and Bottoms, by the Granovetters, East hitched before passing 1. Lazard therefore pictured him with some spade length to go with his long clubs (Lazard knew that this East was in the habit of psyching his longest suit) and known heart length. That helped him picture partner with long diamonds.

2) The Westside Bridge Academy club in Houston has established a lending library. Somehow they have a hardcover volume that collects a year of The Bridge World โ€“ a hardcover book, typeset, not magazine issues bound together. So I took it out. Well, in there is a letter with this hand. The correspondent says that Lazard made “an inferential bid” of 6, and Moyse footnoted saying This is one of the most transcendentally inferential bids to cross our desk in many months. (This is where the word “transcendental” used by Philip Martin above originates.)

Anyway, the year in question was 1953. So the hand was not played in 1954, but either in 1953 or late 1952.
Aug. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Advancer couldn't jump at her first turn. Now she thinks we're getting rich defending 2? I think it makes more sense to define the double as showing a maximum non-jump, and desire to compete further. (Maybe advancer has 4 5, and is looking to play in a 4-4 spade fit instead of 5-3 hearts? 4=4 majors doesn't make sense, as advancer would bid 1 on that hand and then 2 now.)
Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nitpick: Han not Hans.

As to your question: This is a three-card difference, not a one-card difference. Suppose it was 1-card, 5 spades with East and 4 with West; in that case the sentence would come out like this:

When West is known to hold 4 spades and 2 small clubs, while East is known to hold 5 spades and 1 small club, lefty has 7 cards left, and righty has the same 7.
Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At matchpoints, this is close. (At imps much less so.) But we are known to have less than half the deck, 4/5 of our strength is in the enemy suit, and neither partner nor we have much shape. A 2 call might direct a bad lead. If partner has the hand with a heart fit we're hoping for, that makes 2 a good contract, she might overcompete. Maybe I'm being overly conservative, but it seems to me that the bad things that might happen outnumber the good.
Aug. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't believe we've gotten this far down the comments and nobody has made a Doctor Who joke. (Not that I can think of one myself off the top of my head.)
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you are playing Axx in hand opposite QTx in dummy, and you lead towards the Q, LHO will nearly always hop with the K if it has it. If you see a low card, play the T.

When you're playing NT and need to knock out an ace, GIB will almost always duck the first round and take the second. It doesn't look for a count signal from its partner.

GIB will almost never underlead honors in the early middlegame. If GIB wins an ace at trick one, and then shifts to a suit where you hold AQ in hand, the K is almost certainly offside. Plan accordingly.
July 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are a half dozen photos in the article, and the two that show smoking are in black-and-white and are obviously old. I don't think that makes it look like lots of smoking happens today.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit seems to be the opposite of King Arthur in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. “One…two…three!” “Five, sire!” “Five!”
July 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
.

Bottom Home Top