Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Kyle Rockoff
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
lol agreed. To be clear, I was West in this auction.
Nov. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only agreement is DOPI, so I guess pass shows at least a king.
Nov. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good point– added both.
Nov. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends on Vulnerability? Partner's overcall style? Familiarity with opponent's minor opening style? Skill level of those around the table?

Expecting to come to an answer on a specific 4 point range in kind of ridiculous. And honestly why does the response have to be a 4 point range? You're making a lot of assumptions here.
Nov. 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hey Robert! According from my research with Philip, to my knowledge under the ACBL General Convention Chart, all artificial openings require a firm minimum of 10 HCPs, whereas natural bids require a firm minimum of 8 HCPs (well this may be changing b/c 8-9 Natural 1NT bids may be outlawed with the new charts, but the rest is more or less set). I think this explains your director call with Flannery.
Under general convention chart, there are more regulations regarding responses to strong 1C bids. To have artificial non-gameforcing responses other than 1D waiting (e.g. transfers to 1C), your bid must promise 15 HCPs minimum. Luckily Luke and I don't play transfer responses, so if my understanding of the feedback here is right, we can play 1C as less than 15 HCPs (in terms of lowest expected deviation) as long as non-GF responses aren't artificial.
Midchart those restrictions are lifted. This is actually one of the reasons why with Philip I don't play transfer responses to our hybrid club, b/c it's only mid-chart, and not General Convention chart legal.
Hopefully I got this one right from all the discussion here. Thanks everyone!
Nov. 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You should give people a specific abstain if they would have passed or bid 3 over 2. I suspect a lot of people might not double.
Oct. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On second thought… good point– added to poll. Now the list should be exhaustive (please update if you already voted and you prefer one of the new options).
Oct. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah but do I really want to make 4 more options for “Indifferent A, Yes B”… “Indifferent B, Yes A…” etc? I think the polarization is more interesting and makes formate simpler for the reader.
Oct. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you have to treat 3 as a game try for the majors. While undiscussed, you really can't use UI to assume partner messed up her earlier bid. Without UI, I would say 3 would be a reasonable counter-gametry (which shouldn't be passed with spades agreed and partner knowing your preference)– but given UI it seems like you have enough to deduce partner can use that as an excuse to escape to a reasonable contract. Given you have a max with 2 club honors, I think the best logical alternative would be 4 (choice of games in the majors).
Oct. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about: P-1-1-2NT-3NT ?
Oct. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think south can probably scrimp up a 1 overcall if you want to be cheeky, but pass is normal. North's pass to the balancing double (great action which I endorse) is atrocious, probably the main blame. How much does he think his partner can have in defensive HCPS?
Oct. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes usually (could be a bal NT raise too, no stopper).
Oct. 8, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you need it to be strong, just in case the opps are psyching (as per the sample hand). If you've aren't strong, you've already shown takeout shape– partner will know what suit is best to scramble to, so you really don't need it be “pick a minor” or anything like that.
Oct. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This has been posted long enough– I decided not to wait for the push and bid 3 directly. Ilan and I were discussing it, if there was anything lost by bidding 2 first than 3 later. I suppose it slightly depends on partnership style for the balancing X, so maybe some adjustment for that if necessary.
Oct. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hey guys!–

Any particular advice or things that have worked for either of you in promoting college bridge on campus? Given that you each have had a chance to run a college bridge club at two different universities and have taught elsewhere, are there any common themes that have worked particularly well? Running Northwestern's bridge club, we always seem run into people who have the interested in learning, but we struggle to push them further into the game.

Also Zach, looking forward to a good match at the trials in December!
Oct. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With heart shortness, you don't really have a club control in hearts. A marginal spade game is possible if partner somehow has the Ace of hearts as a entry to double finesse spades (oh yeah partner needs spade support) and some combo of the top 3 diamond honors (oh yeah partner needs that too). Not really impossible, but no constructive way to find it, since all of West's main bids are a GF. Matchpoints, pass rates better (or perhaps a non-forcing 2, if available, so you have clubs controlled, but partner rates to also have shortness so it's more of a tossup).
Sept. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Opener now has clear extras with the heart void, but not clear where the fit is. I might just swing out 5 (implying partner, pick spades or clubs, and what strain given I didn't open a strong opening), but it's nasty with no agreements. Taking the low road here is also very reasonable, nothing to be ashamed of.
Sept. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only time I can imagine the signal is count is if partner has a small doubleton, and the opponents are playing some sort of modified min/max michaels where North would overcall instead of cuebid, and decided randomly not to invite.
Sept. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My guess is partner holds A432 of hearts and can't imagine you lead low from honor 3rd, so is playing you for a doubleton. I can't imagine why partner would give you count on trick one, unless you have a strict agreement to give count in this sequence.
Sept. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Start with 1– way too much of your hand is in the opponent's suit (I like X followed by 2 to show a more concentrated suit). When partner responds with values, now you have an very easy 3NT rebid.
Sept. 24, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top