Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Donald Lurie
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
kindly explain what you mean by “results over learning”.
6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or might have difficulties in terms of having the funds necessary for classes, lessons, reading bridge books, or even for table fees. And, spoiler alert, not every bridge book out there is necessarily well written or constructed in a manner that's conducive to a certain person's learning styles. I will say that more recent book have become better in this regard.
On the other hand, the are some free sites online where incredibly comprehensive instruction and information is available on a wide spectrum of topics in formats that permit you to proceed at you own pace. As I did in another thread, I strongly recommend Howard Schutzman “Bridge Sights” web site that has so much on so many topics and skill issues, many of which are in interactive programmed format.
And, if there are any questions about how much interest there is from players in learning new material, check out the number of people that attend his weekly online (BBO) workshops/ seminars and also how many kibitz his table when he's playing. People want to learn
7 hours ago
Donald Lurie edited this comment 6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Please explain what you mean by “very limited upside”.
TY
9 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thx RR:
neither would I. but when you have 2 partners, both good bridge players, recommending the bid, it makes you wonder or re-think
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, and to everyone
thx for all your input. As I said, doing this poll proved to be harder than I anticipated, and It appears that there are some differences on these issues.
I am aware that the meaning of dbl here can depend on the range of the 1NT bid. That's why I designated the range at 15-17 +/-.
I had always thought that the double of a transfer showed some values and was more than a suggestion that partner lead the suit (unless there was a good reason not to) ie not just a suggestion of a lead, possibly to help win a board or not let the opps make a contract by avoiding a bad lead by partner.
When the Jx, QJxxxx, JTx, Jx hand occurred at the table, my partner doubled and strongly defended the double. Part of the rationale was the message that the hand could not support/ didn't want any other suit led. I thought that QJxxxx or, as occurred in other hand, QTxxx (and virtually nothing outside) was a somewhat insufficient holding. And I was told that the double was just a suggestion. Again, not what I had originally thought. When I gave the hand to another of my partner's this partner also recommended a double. Yet 92% of those polled on BW did not double with the hand. Argh.
So I constructed this poll, trying to find out what, in the absence of prior discussion, would be the mainstream interpretation of (did it demand the lead, etc) and criteria for such a double. As with so many other things, this appears to be one more area that requires partnership discussion. Judging from this poll and the hand posted, it seems that the majority expect somewhat more in order to make the lead-directing double, assuming that it is played as lead-directing. However, I must admit that a few learned responses surprised me.
Again, l sincerely than all of you who have answered, commented, responded to this poll.
Tough game, this Bridge
23 hours ago
Donald Lurie edited this comment 23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As the votes and comments come in, I see that the question of suit length was not clearly asked. For example, if you make a lead-directing double of a transfer at the 2-level, would this show a hand where you would want partner to support with support (Hxx or so?) and some values (a suit and hand that can survive a rewind)? What does a double say about suit quality as well as suit length (if anything)?
Perhaps the questions should have been what is the minimum hand strength and minimum suit that you would expect/ require for a lead-directing double of a 2-level transfer by the opponents after 1NT - 2Y

I apologize: writing this poll turned out to be harder than anticipated.
TIA
April 20
Donald Lurie edited this comment April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
please provide an example for a minimum vul. double after 1NT - p - 2Y (transfer)
Thx
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx dale: fixed/ specified
i had thought that designating the double as lead-directing would be sufficient. My bad
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx for your compassion Peg
I still have trouble counting to 13 anyway
so be it
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
oh, great
you are right, only 8 tricks.
heck, if i can't even count to 8 correctly how the —– can I be expected to be able to count to 13 :)
I sit corrected
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx, running a mac :(
April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jyri- look again, i also added the opps hand.
thx
April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thx to everyone who responded.
after 38 votes it seems to be about 6 to 4 in favor of passing. Would the addition of the J be enough?
However, there seems to be some difference of opinion in terms of whether of whether to bid 4N (2 places to play?) or 5 if one feels that it's advisable to bid. In retrospect, I wonder whether 5 should be more like some 4-6 or, better, 4-7?

fwiw, you probably weren't beating 4 on this hand. (and addition of J wouldn't have mattered except, possibly as an offensive asset in 5)

Partner's hand was J73, K9, KQJT64, A9

lho: AT94, AJT743, 732, void/ rho KQ862, void, A85, J7654 - i think the spots are right.
another BBO revenge hand.
April 19
Donald Lurie edited this comment April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, for the 3 who voted in favor of Double of the transfer, please explain your rationale?
April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is also an article on the internet by Karen McCallum called “Understanding & Defending Against the Mini-Notrump (10-12) - Originally by Eric O. Kokish. In it, she seemed to be preferring a transfer system such as the Mohan convention.
My P and I have used Mohan (when I can remember it). Like other methods (except maybe old Ripstra), it seems to have similar difficulties handling 3-suited hands, hands which might make a takeout double or a 1m or 1M opening bid. Some bidding agreements are needed for such hands. Otherwise, it seems to work decently (at least as ”well" as any other method that I'm aware of) They all will have some hands that they handle better than others at times.
Hope this is helpful
DHL
April 19
Donald Lurie edited this comment April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx
i was wondering about 2 vs 3. have often wondered whether such j/s are better left for true, concentrated 2-suiters (not doing Gaz.) or some solid suit hand with easier rebids. Otherwise seems to push the bidding high just to shows “points” / GF while using up so much room
April 19
Donald Lurie edited this comment April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx richard
April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx jack
April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thx CZ
awesome: i don't have the tech savvy to know how to run such sims, so i really appreciate your time and effort. I just try to visualize various possible combos.
thx so much
April 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thx CZ
BBO revenge: s were 4-1 with QTxx in one hand, can't make 6 (at least not on a spade lead).
But, do you want to be there? Should you be in 6?
Some believe it's a conspiracy.
April 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
.

Bottom Home Top