Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ken Bowlby
1 2 3 4 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Minors. It can't be “scramble” since you could just pass and defend 2H
Oct. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner and I agree - Blackwood with no agreed suit (or ironclad insistence on a suit) = Key card for our last shown suit.
Oct. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North bids over 3S = 100% of the blame (or credit, depending on what happens
Oct. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One of us is confused: “Yes, a case could be made that continuing hearts was a failure to play bridge but North might have had KJ9 of hearts.”

South is looking at the H KJ32 in dummy. West (I agree it should have been East) said his 4H bid was KB, and upon learning East had 0 or 3, bid 6D – West expected 3 keycards but East has ONLY 2! Thus, North is odds on to have either the DK or CA. Thus, play a club at trick 2.

Am I missing something??
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks - I had temporarily overlooked that 2 suits had been bid. Cheers
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard, You can see from my prior comment that we are very much on the same wavelength, except that with my regular partner we treat the 3H cuebid as asking for a heart control, rather than showing control. Can you comment on whether your treatment (“showing”) is more commonly used? Thanks
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed, I like your reply and get the humor, and in full humor answer that I cannot retrieve the law book because I threw the director in on top of it! Even a POOR director should say (nicely) “Everyone stop!” after the 2D bid. So I can only wonder what law advises what result to rule after a director REMAINS AT THE TABLE and allows an unmitigated bidding-rules disaster to go on for (excluding passes) SEVEN bids?! (2C,“NO-2D”, 2H, 2S, 3D, 3H, 4D).

One thing is certain: we are not in Kansas anymore
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An interesting auction - I would welcome any feedback on my thoughts….

With my partner, 3H could be asking me to bid 3NT with a stopper OR showing 4-cd support + slam interest in Spades: to be clarified next bid, as in your auction. So I could not bid a “serious 3NT”.

That makes the 4H bid interesting, as I am either A) cue-bidding the Ace DESPITE not bidding 3NT or B) it is “Last Train” which says nothing specific about hearts. I don't think that I am REQUIRED to bid 3NT with the Ace of Hearts, but partner and I have not discussed this. (Tomorrow we will!) In the absence of that discussion, I would treat 4H as “Last Train”, since pard may well not believe that I have the HA and did not bid 3NT.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Partner says no and promptly bids 2D”. Once the director failed to intervene before RHO acted over the 2D bid, there should be a pp against the director! IMHO, the most reasonable assumption is that partner “mis-heard” the question and thought that the “No” meant accepting the bid. However, since that was not the case and any pp against the director does not resolve what happened at the table, I suggest both pairs be assigned an average-minus on the board (@ MP's) or that the board get thrown out @ Imps
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe partner needs to know about hearts. With the Ace I will bid 7S and with the King I will bid 6H. Depending on the rest of my hand, if I hold the HA I also have some cute alternative bids: 6NT, 7C, etc., but I also believe we already have gone past the point where we have thoroughly discussed and agreed upon our systemic bids in this type of situation.

If I can bid only 6S and end up on lead against 7C*, I will lead a Diamond.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I chose “DBLE & pass 2D” as the lesser of awkward coices. I understand why some would choose 2C, but that would be against partnership agreement for me. I also understand why most chose 1H but, as mentioned by D. Lurie above, I would be too worried about missing a Spade fit after LHO bids more clubs - with my DBLE I am willing to take the risk of reopening with 2H if it goes 2C-P-P to me, and willing to DBLE again if it goes 3C (weak)-P-P to me.
Oct. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Before the Wuhan events started, I did not know and could not find where I might get daily updates. Now, a BIG THANK YOU for the daily bulletins on BBO! Do the people who put these together get paid? If yes, my guess is not enough. Thanks again
Sept. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This seems like a problem that should not be a problem, so I assume the BIT was partner wondering were to eat dinner tonight? If I raise to 4C, then I am always passing 4H, so partner can take all the time (s)he wants. I also will take no inference from the BIT in my defense. I wonder if I should have bid 5C at my first chance?
Sept. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would you consider a friendly amendment: “I (deeply) regret that you have been offended by my comment” ….. The politician does not “apologize”, and shifts the blame for offense to the other party.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have raised 3D to 4D at my 3rd call. Not having done so, now I must bid 4D and my partner will be less certain of my Diamond support.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A followup to my comment above - Does anyone planning an ACBL Regional have the curiosity and courage to offer a separate section in the Saturday pairs: All systems up to & including ___ allowed. Minimum ___ # tables to run the section.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm always fascinated by the ebb & flow and directional changes of these BW threads. I suggest that Multi is neither the culprit nor the savior - It is a symbol of any move or resistance to more open systems. For those who care (one way or another), why not ask your club to have one game a week WITH “almost anything goes” systems, and one per week WITHOUT? Track the changes in attendance and member comments. (Let me anticipate one type of response to this: A test at clubs is not comparable to tournament conditions & competitors)
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Spades break, the Heart Q drops, and the winner of the 3rd club trick cannot lead a 3rd spade to prevent a ruff (assuming spades are played twice asap). I'm also going to assume that declarer got to dummy on his/her own power and good play. Nobody did anything wrong
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks to all who responded. It has been helpful
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Andrew
Sept. 6
1 2 3 4 5
.

Bottom Home Top