Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jack Spear
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 128 129 130 131
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Here I think “wet” translates as “meek.” The auction seems strange immediately when East does not raise spades nonvul, while partner didn't make a penalty pass initially. Because 2 was limited, we are obligated to bid more than a wet 3's at our second turn. Unfortunately 3 will likely attract 3NT from partner anytime he has a stop, and passing then has risk. 4 at least prevents us from playing our slam hand in a partial, so may be the “dry” choice.
Dec. 7
Jack Spear edited this comment Dec. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner is showing controls in both red suits here, otherwise he would cuebid the one suit where he had a control. I don't think we can pass holding these trumps, but our hand is poor for the bidding so far, worthless clubs, and we have already shown the 4 spades.
Dec. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree that making a takeout double here vulnerable is too risky with partner likely broke. Let's win the tournament on another hand.
Dec. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AXXXXX XX KX XXX Playing this hand in 5 down one might convince someone the asking system itself is flawed when responder is unable to accurately describe hand strength. (Directing the club lead with the control-ask and response can also be bad, although this time a club was likely being led anyway.)
Nov. 28
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AJXXXX QJX K XXX Playing this hand in 4 making seven might convince someone that the asking system itself is flawed when responder is unable to accurately describe hand strength.
Nov. 28
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Initially, the odds strongly favor partner holding long hearts, since there are many more cards in that suit available for him to hold. After the opener bids hearts, likely showing five, the odds go up considerably that partner holds spades. Because we passed 2, showing support for diamonds, we can bid spades next to find out if that is his other suit. Impossible to tell for sure…
Nov. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We should not stop here, because we are the self-appointed captain in this sequence, and partner should not be allowed to continue over our signoff. (We might be off the first two club tricks.) Unfortunately, if partner must bid past 4 over our 4 asking bid with a doubleton , we may have bypassed our safety level.
Nov. 25
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT is descriptive, and partner will no longer need to consider the possibility that we have 6+. 2 saves bidding space for continuations, and lots of agreements are available over 2. (Including artificial 2=some major, 2=no major, 2N=no major with stops)
Nov. 25
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree short of value for 4, which would be the only choice on 16hcp or so. A wide-range agreement here is not a good thing.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There was a similar concept on Bridgewinners a few years back as a defense to penalize the 1 bidder, sounded interesting. Would be interested in your experience doubling on, maybe, at least QTXX with opening hand or better?

Pepsi once told me he played 2 natural over Polish 1, and 2 over 1 was Michael's, so I have always played that simple defense…
Nov. 24
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, the lack of a raise by South makes it seem obvious that partner has doubled with length/values. The next round of bidding should be interesting.
Nov. 22
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Initially it seems like too many specific cards are needed for good slam chances, but…West does rate to hold most of the high 's. Bidding 5 as up-the-line controls may get the desired 5 cue, and we can follow with 5, still not committing to slam, but…passing 4 could never be criticized.
Nov. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, I heard the story but couldn't remember it was John Crawford.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While Kieran's hand is a possibility, I like the treatment that 3 denies 3+ 's, so often will be a cuebid agreeing 's. (Bid 3 always with a fit.)
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Showing/denying a stopper can be important information to convey here through the use of Lebensohl. The takeout double will unnecessarily reveal declarer's distribution when he bids 3m. Normally there will be no additional interference after 2NT when we have this balanced game-going hand. (East could have bid 3 immediately.)

A logical agreement to make previously would have been that our double in this situation should be “stolen bid,” but I don't like doubling here and assuming partner will be on the same wavelength.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT. Involving partner in a decision may not succeed, but guessing whether to try the aggressive 3NT or conservative 3 certainly has no guarantees. At least we will have a learning moment. (How important are these masterpoints we are trying to win in this holiday game?)
Nov. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This psychic artificial 2NT inquiry over partner's weak two has been addressed and re-addressed. I will research (reluctantly) and get back. Thanks for your reply.
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Many club matchpoint players bid 3 without thought–bidding with points vs passing often leads to a good result vs a bad result. When hands like this are posted, I can't help but think 3 doubled went for “sticks and wheels” (1100 = A picture of two upright sticks with two circular wheels.)
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Redouble might work out quite well, since East's average hand would be something like a 5-2-3-3 three-count. If my partner doubled 2 in a money game, it would be steak for dinner.
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. The last I heard, psyching the artificial bid of 2NT was not allowed without a reasonable expectation of game. Someone please update me if this is not so…
Nov. 7
Jack Spear edited this comment Nov. 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 128 129 130 131
.

Bottom Home Top