Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Diamond
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 24 25 26 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just can't see partner ducking the A. The defense could have the 2 pointed Aces.

It seems like declarer has the AK doubleton of .
Oct. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If responder has 6 and a 4-card M and game-going values, he should start with 2.
Oct. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David,

You said “South is only entitled to know what the East-West agreement is.”

That is wrong. South is also entitled to have East explain West's bids. If East had done so, then South would have discovered that East thought that 4 was a cue-bid, and South would have known that East-West might be off another Ace.

I'm not saying that South didn't mis-defend. There was plenty of evidence (East's 3NT combined and partner's 9) that East held the K. However, if East-West had done the right thing, then South would never have gotten this wrong.
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tom, if it were behind screens, I would agree with you. Behind screens, South receives the explanation of all bids from his screen-mate (who would have been West). As long as South receives the correct explanation of their agreement, South would have no recourse.

But without screens, it is completely different. Each player is supposed to explain his partner's bids. And so, in addition to being entitled to know what the East-West agreement is, South is also entitled to know what East thought West's bids meant. If West decides to explain all of East-West bids, then East needs to chime in if West said something about one of West's own bids that was different than what East thought, whether West correctly explained their agreement or not.
Oct. 21
John Diamond edited this comment Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Horrible ruling. You were entitled to know what East thought West's bids meant.
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This redouble should be penalty. Sometimes your RHO is passing out of fear.
Oct. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It might have been nice to bid 3 over 2. Then when you bid 4 over 3NT, I think you would get the point across.
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Great article, Phil.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What's the hurry? We might have 13 toppers and be able to diagnose it during the auction. We can always jump to 6NT later if need be.
Oct. 9
John Diamond edited this comment Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I assume that 2 did not promise 6, or this would not be a problem.
Oct. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 ostensibly suggests playing game in hearts.
Sept. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Counter game try. Not enough to accept, too much to reject. It does not say anything specific about holdings in C or D.
Sept. 28
John Diamond edited this comment Sept. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard Fleet: You agreement makes no sense. If you doubled a weak NT for penalty with a 16 count, and had this auction, would bid over the redouble because you don't have them set in your hand?

If not, then you run the risk of them playing 1NTxx with partner having a hand like this.

If yes, then you never get to collect your number when responder was running from 1NTxx and partner has values.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dave, this auction is not the same as the double of a 5 opening, where partner is aware that you will bid some of the time. Here, responder already bid 1NT. And also, double by responder is clearly penalty. So opener definitely doesn't need to double with a 5404 ace-less 12-count.

You can't have a rule like “never allow a double game swing”. Do you also have the rule “never take a phantom save”, or “never sacrifice and go for more than their game”?
Sept. 22
John Diamond edited this comment Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What's partner supposed to do with a 19 count and 6 spades? Just pass? Partner is probably not imagining that you would bid here in a million years.

The auction started 1 p 1NT. Why would partner think that doubling is inviting you to bid 5 over 5?

The hand that you cherry-picked for partner is a hand that no one would even double with.
Sept. 21
John Diamond edited this comment Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Did 2 promise 6?
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have pulled the double to 2. Definitely pulling now as well. Passing out 1NTxx is beyond crazy.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This may be the best comment ever.
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(deleted)
Sept. 13
John Diamond edited this comment Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another advantage of showing the Queen is that if partner has it then he will know you that you have 6 trumps, and that might help him bid a grand.
Sept. 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 24 25 26 27
.

Bottom Home Top