Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ian Grant
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1-2-3-4-5-6 is one of the most common selections; so if you do win you will be sharing with lots of others.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming I trust my partner's overcall then 5D looks obvious.
On a good day we will make it, on a bad day we will miss slam. C'est la vie.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've been working on something similar in EBUland; my 1D is balanced 12-14 or 18/19 (split range).
My 1NT opening is then unbalanced with 5+ diamonds.

This combines with 5 card majors and a short 1C (forcing).
My 1C is a bucket bid of 11+ hcp.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We could team this up with the idea to replace cards with tablets at big events to prevent cheating. Not only do we now not need to turn up to compete we don't even have to play at all and could still win.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because the double squeeze is automatic even some of the novices will pull it off.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We had a lottery syndicate at work (about 11 of us) with the declared aim of winning enough for us all to retire. I pointed out that to achieve that in the UK (Lotto jackpot varies between about £3 million and £12 million) we would need to put the same numbers on 11 times, rather than 11 different sets of numbers. This would mean that in the event of sharing we would get 11 parts of the total fund to share rather than sharing 1/2 or 1/3 or whatever.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is quite clearly madness; its the equivalent of having a specific opening bid to show a hand with 4 hearts, any other distribution.

Specifically the problem occurs when we have 5S+4H and partner opens 1C/D with 4 hearts and at most 2 spades. It is even then only a problem if we are not strong enough to continue after 1D-1S-2C, 1D-1S-2D or 1D-1S-1NT (n.b. playing weak NT helps here since opener will be 15+ if balanced).

Assuming you are playing strong and 5, better minor and open 1C (thus having 3+ clubs):

You will have 4H on 16.95% of hands.
Of those you will 0-2 spades on 77.71% of hands.
So there is a potential problem on 13.17% of hands where you open 1C/D.

When we have zero spades (11.13% of hands) then partner will have exactly 5 of them on 24.75% of hands; and of those 8.78% of the time they will have 4 hearts.
So we may have a problem on 0.24% of hands where we have 4 hearts.

When we have one spade (32.14% of hands) then partner will have exactly 5 of them on 28.56% of hands; and of those 8.78% of the time they will have 4 hearts.
So we may have a problem on 0.81% of hands where we have 4 hearts.

When we have two spades (34.44% of hands) then partner will have exactly 5 of them on 17.68% of hands; and of those 8.78% of the time they will have 4 hearts.
So we may have a problem on 0.53% of hands where we have 4 hearts.

So we will have the problem conditions on 1.58% of the hands where we open 1C/D with 4 hearts (16.95% of the time); so we are dealing with 0.27% of hands where we open 1C/D. Even then this assumes that partner cannot continue over our rebid.

Forgive me if I don't rush to change my system to incorporate reverse Flannery.
Jan. 11, 2016
Ian Grant edited this comment Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
19-22 seems a bit much, for me it shows a 5 loser hand.
However I don't jump if short in partner's suit just in case they hate mine.
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nope, cos we all gave good days and bad days.
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The problem with your wriggle Monty is that you can't smack the opps when you have the balance of points.
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
6 card suit?
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If south doesn't bid 2S at the first opportunity then I'm assuming they are a beginner. Beginners miss slams all the time.
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have led a heart at trick 1.
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you are right that 3rd seat is the most risky for a weak NT but it is also when it is at its most pre-emptive too. I think the rewards outweigh the risk.
Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have been playing weak NT in all seats for a very long time, the biggest losses are from 1NT not doubled where you don't get to use your wriggle.
Jan. 10, 2016
Ian Grant edited this comment Jan. 10, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nice :-)
Jan. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
…and each of those with bids doubled.
…and each of those with redoubles too.
Jan. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Might have been easier for partner if I had opened….
Jan. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this is a useful article, a good checklist for things to consider when designing your system.

I voted for frequency but am not convinced that the poll is meaningful, it takes more than one ingredient to bake a cake.
Jan. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
…and the feedback loop…monitoring and refining your methods in the cold light of reality
Jan. 9, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top