Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Gábor Szőts
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 is what I would have bid if I were asleep earlier not to raise immediately.
I see no reason to adjust the score. South might have been thinking whether to pass or whether to bid 2 and pass the 2 response.
April 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Gary, the article stated “at favourable vulnerability”.
April 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My partner will pass automatically. Yours not?
April 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For me there seems to be a third option: Partner's BIT suggests bidding 4 so I don't bid 4. However, I believe I am free to double, which I'd gladly do with those quick tricks.
Lacking this option, I chose the second one.
April 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are right, of course. However, if I were to play this transfer, I'd respond as suggested and reserve bids like 3 and above to show various heart raises (some of them might be stuffed in 2 as well).
March 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After 1-2(hearts) you might play that 2NT by opener shows diamonds. I see no need for a natural notrump bid here as you can always relay with 2.
March 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BTW, I have a déja vu feeling, as though this were a hand already published somewhere.
Feb. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is a very tough hand. It seems to me that at trick 3 the best bet might be a low club. If you are hoping for the K in partners's hand the best declarer can do is guess well. Also, declarer may be forced to take a double finesse in spades (having the 8) which you can prevent only while you still have trumps under control.
Feb. 14, 2015
Gábor Szőts edited this comment Feb. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't understand 6. He MUST be off 2 aces.
Feb. 10, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have never understood the concept of the negative double with at least 2 cards in the opponent's suit. Unless you have exactly 2 cards, you have support for only one unbid suit (or you even have an outside doubleton). I feel the odds are against your finding a fit.
I'd play the double as showing at least 1 card in the enemy suit. You gain all the competitive 3-suiters and even if partner guesses to bid your 3-card suit, he will at least find some ruffing value. Without an apparent fit (4333) he will be able to bid 2NT and trust you with the selection of the trump suit.
Feb. 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Per firm agreement, that double is for penalties. Not likely to happen. :)
Jan. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the slam hand my first thought was not 5 but 5NT. Hopefully, after I have already tried to sign off once, it cannot be misinterpreted.
Jan. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the first example 2 may be completely broke. I simply bid 2 in order to find our 8-card fit. With both majors and some strength I start with 1.
With 3-3 in the majors and a very bad hand I'd probably bid 1 then 2 (if forced) unless I have the agreement of rebidding 2 with any bad hand over partner's cuebid.

I did not think the second case was much different until I read Michaels's comment. Anyway, the example sequence would show a weak hand for me because with a stronger one with both majors I'd raise the cuebid.
Jan. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think this type of overcalling problem has a definite solution. I am reluctant to overcall 2 on such a suit because of experiences similar to those of Michaels's.
However, double goes with its own risks. Consider the actual hand. You double, 2 on your left and now what is partner supposed to do? He clearly wants to bid something but what? Aha! The responsive double comes to the rescue. So he doubles and now South has got himself in an unenviable situation. If he bids 3 he has found an inferior fit and will probably go down. Shall he bid 3? He may feel it is not enough but if he bids 4 he will surely find it has been too much. And even if he bids 3 only, his partner might raise thinking he had a hand too strong for a simple 2 overcall.
Jan. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He contracted for 11 tricks instead of 3. I have a hand a singleton and a king stronger than can have been expected.
Would it be far-fetched to visualize xxx, AQxxxx, xx, Kx in partner's hand? I would have passed the double with that…
So a clear 6 for me and I might feel guilty seeing him spread his hand at trick 1 for 13 top tricks if he has the A as well.
Jan. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, typically a 5333 hand.
Jan. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess RD is SOS but what type of hand? It cannot be a 4-suiter, consequently at least one side suit is short. I guess it will often be (5332) with a shaky 5-card . Or it may explicitely guarantee (5332) because opener will always bid his side suit regardless of quality?
If we take it granted that it is (5332) then obviously responder's 1NT is to play, without an 5-card suit.

As with the suggested structure, I think you have a mandatory redouble with almost all semibalanced hands, and use 1NT for SOS.
I still don't see how you untangle the strong pass hand after opener bids a new suit. Raise with an invitational hand and make an impossible jump to 3 if you want to force to game?
Jan. 14, 2015
Gábor Szőts edited this comment Jan. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Let's say opener does not bid 3 on a minimum 54, he bids 2 instead. Now, unless responder bids 2NT on a wide variety of hands, the club suit is lost for good. Even if responder bids 3, apparently good news, opener will have doubt whether he should raise, thereby bypassing 3NT (I don't think responder bids 3 only without a heart stopper). And when he decides to raise, responder will still be in the dark about opener's distribution, which makes him difficult to assess the possibilities of the hand.
Jan. 10, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It shows, however, 9 of opener's 13 cards. If you had to rebid spades it would be almost as uninformative as though you had opened 2.
Jan. 10, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, yesterday I had almost the same problem and I got it wrong so don't expect miracles from me but here is my rather simple reasoning.
Why did West lead an unsupported ace instead of a ‘safe’ heart? Maybe because he was looking at all of the missing honour cards and with 14-15 HCP he decided he was not going to get help in either suit so in fact he decided to go passive.
So, despite having seen a lot of points from West, I'd play him for the Q.
Jan. 7, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top