Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Helene Thygesen
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fair enough, but then you don't have the natural NF 2NT. I suppose 3 or 3 will rarely be much worse than 2NT. But is opener supposed to bid 3 with a singleton clubs, then? Even if we always have a 7-card minor suit fit, we won't always be able to find it.

It's not like you need Ingberman that badly after a 1NT response. This is very different from a reverse following a suit response, where responder could easily be slamish.

So I prefer the BWS treatment. 3M is also available for GF hands so I don't see why 3 needs to be forcing.
Nov. 20
Helene Thygesen edited this comment Nov. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This. Although one could play 2 as Ingberman here, we would need a NF 3 after a 2 rebid, so we might as well play it as NF here also, for consistency.
Nov. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure if it's ever a great idea to propose 3NT while concealing spade support. Maybe opposite a passed hand. But an unpassed partner can have slam interest so we should not mastermind. For example, if he has AKxxx of spades he may bid 7 as he “knows” that we don't have a spade loser.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No system, I just made it up :)
But the general principle could be something like:
- we bid stoppers naturally if possible, or 3M if not possible
- if 3M is not available to show fit, we use 4M-1.
- 4 always shows the double fit
- With spades as our major, 4 is idle so it can be used to show a minor suit fit that doesn't want to make the advanced control bid
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 = hearts, no spades, ostensibly not a club stopper
3 = clubs, no spades, ostensibly not a heart stopper
3NT = hearts and clubs, no spades, no good diamond fit or at least not great slam potential
4 = double fit
4 = great hand for diamonds, no reason to make an advanced control bid in hearts or clubs
4, 4 = different kinds of spades fits
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 is not a psyche, it just shows 12+ points (Drury).
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 where it is going to end anyway, and I don't want to leak more information than needed. My first thought was to bid 3 in case we have slam, but seeing that 2 is speciafically 3-card support, this sounds unlikely.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So with four hearts and say 10 points you have to bid 2? If doubler then bids 2, aren't you stuck? Or is the idea that double will bid their lowest 4-card suit, so the 2 rebid shows extras?

If it goes
(1)-X-(p)-2
(p)-2
doubler can't promise extras as they could have a 4324 minimum. Does this mean that in this auction, advancer could have bid 2 instead of 2 with four hearts?
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends how wide a range the 2 bid has. If it's an old-fashioned 8-11 it would be nice to have a way to invite with 3-card support, and maybe to stop in 3.

But in that case we should probably play 2 as the invitational hand with 4342 or 4351, then the strong hands with spades either rebid 3 or 3.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 2NT is game forcing then 3 doesn't show a minimum with clubs.

I have seen three response schemes (with small variations) played by decent Dutch partnerships:

The standard responses are:

2: natural, only very mildly encouraging
2NT: gf. Opener will now bid:
- 3: four clubs
- 3: four diamonds (you may invert 3/ to make responder declare)
- 3: five clubs
- 3: five diamonds
- 3NT: 4-4 minors
- higher bids show a six-card minor
3: P/C
3: invitational or stronger with fit
3: preempt
3: natural, invite

With the standard scheme there's no way to invite without a fit for hearts.

An alternative scheme:
2NT: invitational or stronger. Opener rebids 3/ natural with a minimum

Another alternative:
2NT: asks, could be weak, could be invitational with fit. Opener always
……rebids 3/ naturally, even if max.
3: to play, but probably opener will convert with 5-0 minors or such
3: to play
Nov. 6
Helene Thygesen edited this comment Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Suppose we have the agreement that if dummy playes a Jack or lower and I fail to cover it, I give count (because with a positive attitude I would usually have covered it). Should we say “attitude” or “depends” in that case?
Nov. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It may be too late for opps to enter the auction at our table, but there may be some -130 or whatever elsewhere in the room.
Oct. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My heart support can hardly be better, and I have an unexpected lack of spade wastage. If I am not supposed to bid 4 with this, when am I?

Of course, with creative people around the table, everything could be wrong. But I am making the normal bid regardless.
Oct. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When we have a double fit, don't we play 6-ace blackwood?
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, Phillip's comment about shortness in opps' suit is very important. With some length in opps' suit you can be reasonably confident that partner will bid, unless he is weak in which case the board obviously belongs to opps anyway.
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A 3-level preempt has the playing strength of an opening, so bidding (3)-3 on a semibalanced 15-count as well as an 8-count with a 7-card suit is OK, I think.
Oct. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There was a recent article in the Dutch magazine “IMP” by Maarten Schollard, where the author argued for “weak over weak”, for example (2)-3. Strong hands would have to double, then. I am not sure exactly when it would apply, though, as there are situations in which double followed by a change of suit just shows a flexible hand, so the jump overcall is the only way to show a strong 1-suited hand.

I am not convinced about the merits of weak-over-weak, and I find the arguments by Ron and Nigel more compelling, but apparently it is a matter of partnership agreement.

There could be a rational for preempting over certain multi-bids such a 2 showing either a weak hand with diamonds or an Acol-ish 2, though.

Also, somewhat depending on vulnerability and whether partner is a passed hand, I think (4)-4 should have a very wide range and include some hands where you would have opened with a preempt yourself.
Oct. 20
Helene Thygesen edited this comment Oct. 20
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
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
.

Bottom Home Top