Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Helene Thygesen
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Standard is invitational in most places but I prefer to play it as forcing, even without WJS. I am not sure if WJS is so relevant anyway as you could still have a weak hand with 64
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The range of 3 has a slightly wider ranger than the unopposed jump rebid, so I think it makes sense to play it as something like 7-9 with a good 6-card suit. Not forcing, but constructive.

Good question, by the way.
Oct. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can we get out in 2 after partner's 1NT rebid? Not that it matters for this decision, I bid 1 regardless. But it wouldn't surprise me if 1NT is the long term winner.
Sept. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We were once disadvantaged by this - partner had six good clubs but obviously couldn't bid them naturally after they transfered to clubs.

It really isn't rocket science - just follow the rule always to say what a bid shows, never to use convention names.

Everyone above the kitchen bridge level should know better (and if you play kitchen bridge you don't alert, you just let the player who bid 2 explain how he meant it).
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I always found it weird. When we have already announced (near) GF strength, I would think the priority should be to sort out fit and O/D.
It makes more sense when they preempt over a strong 1 but even then I would prefer to play pass as ostensibly penalty and double as optional.
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks. Yes of course
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If we don't play Lebensohl, I think we need to play this as nonforcing. What else with 4216 10-count?

Maybe we could play that double followed by 3 is weaker. But sometimes we don't want to double because we can't tolerate a 3 bid or a pass.

My prefered agreement is to bid Lebensohl with 8-10(11) points and a GF natural 3 bid. Transfers may be more efficient in terms of bidding space but with LHO having made an overcall we prefer to declare ourselves.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We rarely open very light in 3rd seat (and obviously not in 4th either), but Drury is still useful:
- With a flat 12 count you don't want partner to raise to the 3-level as the tactical advantage of doing so is small now that both opps have passed. Especially when we have spades, there's a decent chance we will be allowed to play a safe 2
- With a flat 6-count, it is better to raise than to use 1NT, especially as a passed hand since 1NT isn't forcing. Putting the flat 9-counts in Drury allows us to raise with some ugly hands that would have used the forcing 1NT in 1st/2nd.
Aug. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes but you wouldn't have bid 2 with that holding.
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This may depend on the rest of the hand. If I have nothing outside the suit, it may be reasonable to lead small in case partner has Jx or Ax. If I have plenty outside the suit, the king is normal.

Ten would be very strange and Queen only if we do this systematically, or if K=count, A/Q=attitude
Aug. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also: what would 1NT show now?
Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Take-out of hearts is the agreement I have with the only p with whom I have discussed it.

Reasons why it is more interesting to suggest spades than hearts as a possible strain:
- Opener has exactly four spades. Responder could easily have 5+ hearts.
- If it's a total misfit, partner can sometimes leave the double in and it is opps rather than us who is in troubles. OTOH, partner can almost never convert a double that is t/o of spades, so it will force us to play on a board where nobody wants to play.
- Defending spades at the 1-level requires 7 tricks. 2 requires 8.
- We might want to compete to 2 over 2. We are unlikely to want to compete to 3 over 2
- Partner has little so if my hearts are in front of responder's hearts, we don't want to get involved in this auction. With four decent spades behind opener's suit, OTOH, the board might belong to us.
Aug. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted 3 to get partner to show a club stopper or a 4-card major. But maybe 2NT is better. If partner has J9xx and lefty KQTx(x), the contract is better played in my hand.

2 is also OK. I am a bit concerned that 3NT maybe be better even with a 5-3 fit in spades, or that partner may raise on a doubleton. But neither of those are likely to happen.
Aug. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think 2 is worse than all the options listed. It doesn't describe the hand very well and doesn't disturb the opps much either. If a Ghestem bid was available so I could at least tell partner about the clubs it would be better, but even then I prefer just bidding spades.

Opposite a passed partner and not vulnerable, I don't like 1 much either. It's too toothless. I suppose 3 is normal but 4 could easily work better. West may have an easy 4 bid over 3 but have a problem over 4.
Aug. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting, my first thought was that 7 when p might have only second round heart control is a bit optimistic. But he is probably right - 6 with no better than Kxxxxx must mean he also has A
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just made up a gadget: 4 is a transfer to hearts, while 4 shows four hearts and another place to play, ostensibly four spades.

Alternatively, discuss with p what the difference is between a fast 5 and a slow one (going through 4, or maybe 4NT if that isn't natural).

Without specific partnership agreements I will assume that 4NT is natural, the slow 5 is a general slam try with doubt about the strain (could be 5 5, maybe?), so 5 it is. Unfortunately it doesn't show or ask for anything specific but at least I have transfered the blame :)
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the differences between MP and IMP are overrated. The main differences are in bidding judgment (for example more aggressive game bidding at IMP when vulnerable, and more aggressive penalty doubles at MP) but those kind of things don't require partnership discussion as it is just about individual decisions.

It may be reasonable to discuss some style issues, such as less disciplined preempts w/r at IMP, more aggressive leads at IMP and more aggressive overcalls at MP. But those kind of things don't necessarily require different systems.

If you play primarily IMP with one p and primarily MP with another, and you are a system geek, it may be useful to have that in mind when discussion system. The Nightmare system, for example, which has very few invites and plays most auctions as either sign-off or GF, is presumably optimized to IMP. The agreement that “2NT is never natural” is also something you might want to play at IMP.

But those are rather extreme examples. Popular systems and conventions are all approximately as suitable for IMP as for MP.

You might prioritize your system development effort differently, though. If you primarily play IMP, you should put a lot of effort in slam bidding agreements. If you mostly play MP, you might decide to keep the slam agreements basic and devote more time to discussing scrambling or Lebensohl in competitive auctions.
July 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMO 3 should be NF. There are plenty of bids available for stronger hands. And I don't want to have to pass 2NT with a 2155 10-count.

With a 2254 and a small doubleton I think you just bid 3NT or 4 depending on strength. 4 might actually suggest that specific hand type if you could have shown shortness at the 3-level. Or, if your method is to show stoppers at the 3-level, you can bid a strong doubleton.

Usually partner will have stoppers in the majors. With AKx-xx-Jxx-QJxxx I am not sure that 2NT is the right response.

With this hand I bid 3 or 3, depending on agreements.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I prefer 2 to dbl.

I am not sure about 4, I suppose it depends on style.

4 is clearly wrong. I am not sure what the correct call is (pass, 4 or 5 are possible depending on the meaning of 4 and whether you want to cater to 2 being a psyche).

5 is fine IMO.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would explain your full agreements, as you did here. Opps will also have noticed that partner didn't ask. The only exception I would make is if I knew that partner had studied their convention card already - in that case I would just say what it means given that partner understands the meaning.

Partner already knows that he has misbid (assuming he has - you don't know that for sure, of course) so I don't think there are any ethical problems for him. You obviously have to bid as if he had bid correctly.
July 3
Helene Thygesen edited this comment July 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
.

Bottom Home Top