Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Parsons
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 27 28 29 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“DD” stands for “Double Dummy,” Eric. I said it's a 97% make using a DD simulator.
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah, I was in the same Common Game, and unfortunately led the A.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the 3 bidders. Partner has shown a minimum of 10 HCPs and 5 spades (or the equivalent), and with a minimum is expected to pass 3, the partnership thereby missing a likely game in spades. I've posted two other companion hands to this, one with a minimum and the other with slightly above a minimum. Most responders would pass with the minimum hand I posted. Half of the responders would pass with the hand that is slightly above a minimum. For both I ran a simulation and both are more likely than not to make game, with East having a hand that conforms to a “weak two” bid, according to the simulation. The hand that has slightly above a minimum (10 HCPs, including six spades and Qx of diamonds) makes game 99% of the time.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Paul. I'll do that from now on.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting and a bit unexpected poll result for me. I'd be interested in clarifying comments from the responders. My questions:

(1) Would your reply be different if we were non-vul?

(2) In most of the descriptions I've read of the Unusual-vs-Unusual convention (I think this is widely played), the bid of 3 immediately after 2NT shows a “Constructive Raise” (just below a limit raise) hand with four+ hearts. A direct bid of 3 would show a limit+ raise hearts. And the 3 bid is given “LOTT” protection in these descriptions. So, one would think that a hand with four hearts and worse than a constructive raise (like the hand above) would be bid by passing and afterwards a delayed 3 bid. Is this not correct in usual practice?

(3) My partner believes that the “usual practice” described above should be reversed…that is the weaker hand should bid 3 directly and the stronger hand should pass and defer bidding 3. Do you agree?
Sept. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes
Sept. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On a club lead, declarer wins in dummy with the K, pulls three rounds of trump, finesses the K by winning the Q, plays the A and exits with a diamond. He must then win the K, four diamonds, five spades and the AK, for 12 tricks.
Sept. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed, on the actual hand partner had:

:875
:9653
:K3
:QJ95

Pitching a diamond is wrong, but so was bidding 4, which would go down four. 3NT makes 10 tricks and 4S makes 12 tricks as the cards lie.
Sept. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The only difference (that I can tell) is whether you want to signal an honor in diamonds or not.
Aug. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner's heart holding was 9653, you would signal the 9?
Aug. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, Frances. I'll try to use the right terminology (“follows with”) in the future.
Aug. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The lead of the HQ calls for an attitude signal from partner. Assume all signals are standard.
Aug. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
According to the DD simulator, 5 makes 91% of the time, and 4 makes 99% of the time. I wasn't overly optimistic.
Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about KTxxxx AKQx xx A, which was given two polls ago. 5 is practically cold but three-quarters of the bidders here would miss game with their best bidding sequences (according to both polls combined).
Aug. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, I expect all the 2 bidders would open it in all seats. I guess it is worth an upgrade.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would you open this hand in first seat?
July 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The 4 bidder's hand was:
KJ975
QT872
8
J9
June 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner's hand was:
Q43
KJ
KQ63
A874
June 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For the actual hand, pass was the winning bid.
June 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the actual hand, partner had Qxx of spades and 4 made. I passed, with the idea that 4 making was improbable when we had the balance of power.
June 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 27 28 29 30
.

Bottom Home Top