Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Gábor Szőts
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 88 89 90 91
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is the only way to show your diamonds with a limited hand. Also, you are not likely to hold a game-forcing hand after this bidding.
May 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2-suited bids require a hand containing at most 6 losers.
May 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Please ignore this, I forgot to include options.
May 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did not know whether to vote for option 1 or 3. Are they not the same?
May 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even if South plays low on the second club he's going to lose 4 tricks since East will have 2 ruffs.
So, although there was UI and maybe misinformation, the normal result is 9 tricks in spades. No score adjustment is necessary.
May 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I gave West all the blame while believing that East's 3 was nonforcing. But I also think that East will need significant help from West to make game probable, mostly because his spades are not running and his diamond trick(s) are slow.
By not bidding 3 West blew it.
May 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder what West wanted to show. From East's point of view West could have been quite weak. West endplayed himself into 3NT (not even having a genuine heart stopper), I don't think there was a recovery after 2NT.
It must be admitted that to bid the West hand is not easy at all, he has so many things to show. However, he should have started with a positive bid, by elimination 3.
May 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For us 2 is forcing to game with at least 5 spades. 2NT is natural, invitational (with possibly 5 spades).
We have a hole for the invitational hands with 6 not quite good spades.
May 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think 3 is not forcing but I would double with this hand anyway.
May 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You could play that 3 shows diamonds, while 3 could be a substitution cue-bid.
This is a 10 second old idea of mine.
May 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd rather say traditional. But I'd like to have a way to stop in 3, which might already be too high, on my light 55 vs. my partner's 10 HCP.
May 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used to be an advocate of option 3. Not any more. To force to game you have the cue-bid (and game bids) available. Why force to 4 when 3 might be your limit?

That is only my stand-point at the moment. In reality I'd expect my partners to take 3 as forcing. This post is a good reminder to discuss the matter with them.
May 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They are going down.
May 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North issued a grand slam try with 5NT. South had a side suit worth 3 tricks more than previously announced. Are we really looking for whom to blame? South had a clear 7 bid instead of 6.
May 8, 2018
Gábor Szőts edited this comment May 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder whether the pass over 2 is alertable if it is forcing partner to reopen. Is it not similar to the pass in a support double situation, which we do not alert (or do we)?
May 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4. 3NT may go down if Q is with LHO or diamonds are our weak spot.
3 does not show 5 and a later 4 might be misinterpreted.
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As 2 then 3 is forcing, this is the only way to show an invitational 55.
Small target? Yes, but splinter in clubs is not big either and a forcing club raise can be bid via 2 then 3 (or some fancy jump).
May 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not particularly good hand and I have no bid to describe that my 31 is in , not in . That is, no point in bidding further, take your sure plus.
May 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I love to bid NT with Qx.
May 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess partner played an ‘impossible’ 9, to stress his singleton . It may not have been the best idea but I'm not going to punish him for being over-creative.
So, A for me.

EDIT: I guess I am being over-creative, not partner. He must have an even number of clubs.
If that is 4, declarer is either 5512 and I will have to lead a spade in the hope that declarer is extremely weak and we can score 3 minor suit tricks and 2 in spades. That would also explain why partner, having KQx,xxx,J10x,9xxx did not compete in diamonds.
If partner has a doubleton club then declarer bid strangely, having 4414 shape. But then again, a spade lead is safe now that declarer has thrown away a club trick.

All in all, you were right.
May 4, 2018
Gábor Szőts edited this comment May 4, 2018
1 2 3 4 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 88 89 90 91
.

Bottom Home Top