Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Helene Thygesen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ah right, sorry. Now I see that you play a version where the 3 response just denies a 5-card major.
Jan. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A somewhat popular convention in the Netherlands is Heeman which uses 2 for invite+ with 5+ in a major, and transfers for weak hands with a long major as well as for invite+ with four cards in one or both majors. It is supported by the Jack software. http://www.jackbridge.com/pdf/eheeman.pdf
Jan. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If we blast consistently, the Stayman auction becomes even more informative, although I suppose that is not so helpful to opps. OTOH the blast auction becomes less informative so when we have a classical blast (no 4-card major), sometimes opps will lead a minor because our blast did not deny a 4-card major.

I don't understand why Puppet Stayman is worse than regular Stayman. If opener has both majors and responder has spades, Puppet will not tell opps about opener's hearts. Other than that I see no difference. What am I missing?
Jan. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Was that based on all pairs, or only on those who play strong nt?
Dec. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Normally, when preemptor doubles in front of his partner it shows that he wants to compete further, while when he doubles in balancing seat (like here) it shows that he has assets useful both for competing and for declaring. It is rare because preemptor has transfered captainship to partner, and whether this particular auction is actually possible I am not sure.

Penalty is an alternative agreement and possibly more common in situations such as here where preemptor has not denied goodies in the enemy suit.
Nov. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'll take me 300 or 500, hopefully we can't make game.
Oct. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like transfers/inversion in many competitive situations but I am not sure it matters so much here. Sometimes preemptor has a side singleton to lead and you will prefer his partner just to lead his suit.
Oct. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would think that it would be worse to lead a trump against a minor suit contract. First, they tend to prefer notrumps to a minor if they have all suits stopped so the fact that they play a minor suit contract suggests that there are side suit tricks for us to take in a suit in which one of them is short and may discard their losers if we are too late. Second, they tend to have a 9-card fit, or 10 card fit, when playing in a minor so there is less chance that we can successfully shorten dummy's trumps.
Oct. 3, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As the question is posed it sounds as if we are asked if the standard meaning is alertable. I suppose it was intended as asking weather the non-standard meaning is alertable.

In the Netherlands I think most play it as non-forcing and that is probably also the case in England although I know a significant number of English players that prefer forcing. Either way, neither treatment would be alertable in either country.
Sept. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“It is just normal that people are loyal to their country”.

Maybe normal, but that doesn't make it a good thing.

Now if you are loyal to your country in war I can maybe understand it. Enemy soldiers may be more likely to burn your house than your own country's soldiers. But why on Earth should I assume that Danes are more honest than non-Danes just because I am Danish myself?
Sept. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very close to zero IMPs unless the baseline is a 45+ years old standard.
Sept. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am sure it is theoretically possible that people with certain blood groups, religions, sexual preferences, favourite colours etc are more likely to coffeehouse than others. There might even be some evidence for it. So what?

OTOH I don't need advanced statistical methods to see that there is a trend on this forum that people defend their own countrymates, and I find that a bit pathetic. I would have prefered an ethnically blinded discussion in which nobody knew the nationality of the involved players. Although it really ought not to be necessary.
Sept. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
These kind of tensions are quite common when an international field gets mixed up with a large contigent of local players. This has probably nothing to do with Polish players per se but rather with local players without international experience. I wasn't in Wroclaw so I can't say if it applied here, but what Sabine describes I have seen happening in many other countries.
Sept. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Forcing is quite simple - it means that you never pass it. Never as in NEVER, not just “never”. The implication is that opps can have the agreement that most strong hands pass first and get in later which would specifically show a strong hand - something they obviously can't do if your 1 opening can be passed.

Presumably you will sometimes pass it, e.g. with 432-32-432-65432. Even if you do have systematic ways to respond with zero points.
Sept. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even if it is impossible to make the bridgemates postpone the checking of the opening lead, it could easily be implemented on the server side so that at least the director/scorer would see the flag. This doesn't require changes to the bridgemate software, it just requires someone to program an SQL query on the bridgemate database which is stored in MS Access format.
Sept. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Has anyone experience with “Little Major”? I.e. 1/ shows 4+ hearts/spades while 1 is the strong bid.

I think everybody who is interested in this thread should move to the Netherlands, there you will find plenty of other players with similar weird obsessions. Other than multi 1 I have also encountered pairs playing something similar to little major but with 1 as showing 12-14 balanced. And then we have Boring Club, Looier, Lorenzo and some strange strong diamond system which used to be taught to beginners in Amstelveen. Of course I have also run into Vienna and Moscito but that is a bit mundane.
Sept. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
the bridgemates should obv verify the opening lead. if one is concerned about abuse then defer the validation to after the result has been approved or even to the end of the session
Sept. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have puzzled a lot with making all 1-level openings forcing transfers openings, but it is really difficult to make it playable. I suppose system design is just difficult, except for making small changes to already established systems.

Something like
1 balanced, or 3-suited short in a minor
1 hearts
1 spades
1 three-suited short in hearts
1NT three-suited short in spades

If 6m331-shapes are generally treated as 3-suited (subject to honour location) then this defines everything except for 6m4m, 5m5m and 7m, which are distributional enough to open at the 2-level.

However, the 1NT opening (and, to a lesser extent, the 1 opening) are overloaded. Maybe it could be made workable by allowing the 1 and 1 opening with four cards in the suit shown, but I dislike major suit openings that are “usually 5 but sometimes 4”.

I ended up voting for Polish club except that I would fiddle a bit with the ranges, in particular take the 15-17 w/clubs out of the 1 opening, so that responder will more often be in a position to sign off opposite the weak balanced hand while simoultanously forcing to game opposite the strong variant. So something like swedish club.

Another possibly cute idea:
1 nebolous
1 multi (one 5+ card major)
1/ always canape
1NT strong
Sept. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is possible to play transfers such that pass would deny a 4-card major, a 6-card diamonds and also deny as many as 4 HCPs, but in all partnerships in which I have played transfers, the non-jump responses promise some values. So for me, pass is somewhat less frequent than it would be with natural (Walsh) responses, but probably still more than 1/50. I voted 1/50 but there should be an option for “more frequent”.
Sept. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also, with an electronic playing environment, all tables would be on vugraph so there would be hundreds of people watching. If something similar happened (say a misclaim was accepted), somebody would notice.
Sept. 19, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top