Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ken Gamble
1 2 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I scanned the alert procedure document. It distinguishes the two terms “Alerts” and “Announcements”. For the 1NT Forcing bid, opener should tap the alert card and announce “Forcing”. If the 2C rebid could be a doubleton, then the responder would announce “Could be short”.

Are these announcements required or just recommended? Can the director be called if these announcements are not given and the opponents are hurt?
Sept. 6
Ken Gamble edited this comment Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There was a 5-0 spade break that declarer learned early in the play. There were several ruffs that took place by both defender and by the declarer. In fact this was the argument the defense was using - declarer could easily have last track of the outstanding trumps.
But the case remains that declarer claimed all the tricks because she knew she had all the winners Would you ever play the remaining tricks or state a line of play that didn't include playing the trump first?
June 16
Ken Gamble edited this comment June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Response to wrong post
June 16
Ken Gamble edited this comment June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you, spades are trump. North is declarer.
June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Doug. Another website I wasn't aware of. I wish the lookup wasn't so slow.
May 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Dave and Al. This is exactly what I need (especially the system summaries). I wasn't aware of the USBF site. Now I am.
May 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think several commentators are agreeing that 2-levels responses in both auctions are natural and sign-off. Of course this is standard Lebensohl. 2NT would be used to sign-off in a lower denominational suit.

It would be very rare that responder will have enough points to invite game as most of the points have been consumed by the other 3 players. I think responder's goal is to just find a 2-level contract that has a good chance of making with his minimal points.

In the last several months I have numerous auctions like (1) and (2) so its worth having a solid understanding of handling interference over partner's 1NT overcall.
March 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What worries me about (1) and “system on” is that I will lose 2D as natural and to play. I'm likely to have around 5-6 hcps in my position so a 3-level bid for diamonds is a stretch.

I know I lose right-siding the contract but is that more important than making a 2-level contract? Also the strong hand is on my left and must lead which must be worth something.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This site will calculate the odds and is easier to get the answers than from an odds book.

http://www.automaton.gr/tt/en/OddsTbl.htm
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Several weeks ago a friend passed to me responses to a modified Ogust system he gathered from someone else. These responses seem playable.
3 = (bad, bad)
3 = bad suit, 7+ points
3M = good trump suit
3oM = 6-4 in the majors.
3NT = (good, good)

So far, I've had half dozen Ogust auctions with the new responses. No 4-4 fits found yet. The hcps for the 3 and the 3oM responses are yet to be determined but 7+ (maybe 8) seems right. Any ideas?
Jan. 1
Ken Gamble edited this comment Jan. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted
Dec. 26, 2016
Ken Gamble edited this comment Dec. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was the dummy for this case and called the director when offender's partner was about to lead. Director reprimanded me stating that I could call him. Hence I started this post. Thanks for clarification and the reference to the Bulletin's ruling.
Dec. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just for curiosity, in Benoit's example, lets assume partnership plays 2D as transfers but opener alerts it as GF Stayman. Let's say 4H is a splinter bid after a transfer and then 3H shows 5-5 GF in the majors.
Is there anyway the partnership can recover from this misunderstanding?
Dec. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
#4 So what do you do with a singleton? Bid or pass? You don't have GF values to bid a lower denomination 5-card suit. They are likely to have a 8 or 9 card fit now.
Dec. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the many comments. I knew it was dangerous to draw too much from just two posts and 1 published article. I'm surprised the high percentage of players who use Neg. Doubles and also seeing no bidding books discussing it. I would like to ask several more questions taking a different approach. Hoping to elicit more insight on how partnerships are using Neg. Dbl.

You have opened 1NT with 15-17 points and hear partner make a Neg. Double over a 2H single-suited overcall. What do you think partner has?
1. Could he have 1, 2, or 3 cards in that suit? In other words the 2-card rule is not rigidly enforced.
2. Is he showing we have a Balance of Points of about 22-24? or could we have less?
3. Is there anything else you can draw from his Neg. Double?

BTW, I'm back with the normal approach of starting my list with number 1
Dec. 6, 2016
Ken Gamble edited this comment Dec. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
x
Dec. 6, 2016
Ken Gamble edited this comment Dec. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But it's an award winning European one!
Nov. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This auction came up recently in an auction with a computer bridge program. it plays it exactly as Martin and Ronald describes. I have never seen this treatment in the literature, but it does seem to make sense.
Nov. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The boards for each director are stored in separate suitcases and the room is cleaned every day with no extraneous decks kept in the room. So she knew the two cards were from her boards. She did mention the colors so only the boards with those colors needed to be checked.

The fouled dummy was found on the first round and then corrected so no other players had this problem.

Sorry if I wasn't too clear.
Aug. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My major problem with this whole affair was the director allowed the game to start with TWO fouled boards. Even though her warning probably was sufficient, it wasn't ideal.

One fouled board had a blue backing and the other yellow. So
I think the proper solution was to have the players at all the tables with cards of blue and yellow backings, to count their cards until the two deficient hands were found, then correct the boards and finally start the game.
Aug. 20, 2016
1 2 3
.

Bottom Home Top