Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Gábor Szőts
1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 89 90 91 92
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the votes. Here is the full hand: http://bridzs.hu/result/3894/3283/18imp1b11-4.htm

I held the hand in question and chose to double. Partner led the 4. Declarer, who now knew that to finesse was futile, went up with the A, took two rounds of trumps (mistakenly), then led the J.
At this point partner could have saved the day by playing low but of course he covered. Now declarer could discard his clubs on dummy's diamonds, take the ruffing finesse in clubs, and had only one heart to lose.
April 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Later.
April 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I use the form I judge is best.
April 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you think someone might bid something?
April 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would lead the major in which I have no high honour. If no help there, I'd lead the shorter one.
April 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4NT if that is what asks for key-cards. In fact I could bid 7 immediately because partner seems not to have a spade stop and then where are his points?
April 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4. Partner's suits do not come in fast.
April 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4. Plan: correct to 4 over 4.

Pass is my alternative but I'm a coward.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The only time I can understand West's bidding is when he understood his partner's 2 as a nondescript strong bid.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would bid 4 even if I was told that 3NT is the right contract.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In fact NV vs. VUL you still go only -1700 if you take no tricks in 1NT doubled. That means you still win 11 IMPs if they have a grand. And if you go down 6 for -1400 and they have a small slam you have still gained 1 IMP.

Which suggests the idea that maybe doubled undertricks should not depend only upon your vulnerability but also upon the opponent's one.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would not like to see things like Meckstroth's 7 save against 7 (not that I am sure it would have made if he didn't).
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But you did.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In view of the club fit (West doubled clubs, a suit not promised by East) East's double may be criticized to some extent although I fail to find a good alternative because 4 would suggests clubsa as his second suit. Maybe 4NT would do.
However, West's pass lacked thought. He knows of a 10-card fit and if his partner is short in clubs that's also good news for him. 4 seems indicated.

One can only wonder what ‘fairly good’ means.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you open 1NT on every 5(332) then GF, if not then F1 (you have to bid something with a stopperless balanced hand).
So an ‘Other’ would have been useful.
April 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used to play:

1-2
?
2: 5+, UNBAL. Now 2NT/3m is INV, 2M is ART/GF.
2: BAL. Now 2NT/3 is NF, 2 is pup2NT with various GF hands, 3/M is SPL/GF with long clubs.
2: 4441, unlimited. Now 2NT/3 is NF, 3 is GF with clubs, 3M is trumps.
2NT: quasinatural, 6+, GF
3: NAT, NF
3: solid suit, GF
3M: SPL
3NT: 18-19 if included in 1 but this hand may also bid 2 and go on later.

Please note that with 4 we bid 2, not 2.
April 2, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the votes. I would not have thought it would be so lopsided, I expected a couple of 3NT's. Maybe I should have had West raise to 3.

Partner had xx,AJ10xxx,Jx,10xx. I guess he would have bid 3 over 3, then who knows.

The above situation is hypothetical, though. South actually chose to double and of course North jumped to 3NT. Unfortunately, clubs did not behave.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually we do play 2 to show 4 and 3 to show 5 although I am not convinced it is the right way to play. There seems to be a gap with which I'd find 3 as excessive. The hand in question is exactly such a hand.
So I bid 3 but with a fear in my heart.
March 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He was always ready to explain me subtleties of the Meckwell system while commentating on vugraph.
A really nice guy indeed.
March 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, I know what XYZ is.

Our case started with 1 (not 1). And in traditional methods, 1-1-1-2 is a correction, wanting to play 2.

I can't see particular need for 2 being a prelude to game invitation. 2NT, 3, 3 and 3 seems to me adequate armory to express various invitational hands.

The 2NT puppet to 3 may be fine, although sometimes you'd prefer to contract for only 8 tricks.

In my view XYZ is only justified after 1m-1M-1NT. Or maybe after 1-1-1NT as well if playing Walsh.
March 22, 2018
1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ... 89 90 91 92
.

Bottom Home Top