Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Liam Milne
1 2 3 4 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're right Peter - it is a great photo! Thanks for letting me know about your ownership of the photo, I wasn't sure who to credit it to. I have sent you a private message.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not the wrong question for me, Eric. I think getting the 2 bid in is more important than worrying about the problems later. But I do still have to deal with the problems later; hence, the poll!
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. But how would you bid it playing XYZ?
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi David, what's pfa?
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that the conditions are not optimal. Sometimes that's the cards you get dealt.

You can fairly safely assume that 4 doesn't mean anything and that it covers partner's entire range.
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Patrick, the minimum for an opening bid in our system is 11 points and the maximum is about 21 points
April 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit - I don't know how I would rule, likely allowing the claim.

I think the difference in the two suit combinations is that Qx opposite AKJxxx is a common “play high from the short hand to unblock” holding, while Kxx opposite AJx is a common “free finesse” holding. I find it easier to imagine declarer misplaying the first than the second. I can't equate the two situations despite the structural similarities.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Results:

As commented above, I played 10, spade to J (all follow), AK, third heart. East discarded a diamond as I ruffed low.

I made an error by not changing tack and considering the higher likelihood of both the failure of the dummy reversal and the squeeze chances. Luckily for me, when I played a diamond to the A and another heart, East ruffed rather than pitching their last diamond, so I could claim. East was 3=2=3=5.

Kit Woolsey got the whole thing right.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Results: I bid 5 at the table.

Partner, with QT9x AK9xx Ax xx, made an admittedly poor bid of correcting to 5.

With JTxx on our right, 5 was still cold (hearts come in for no loser with Qxxx onside). 5 drifted two off in the delicate 5-3 fit with both reds breaking badly.

4X is complicated with lots of interesting trump situations but most likely down two.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Results: I doubled, a bid which I am not proud of in retrospect. The poll is enough to convince me that I was on drugs.

4x made five in fair enough comfort. Four was always cold.

4 (likely undoubled) is down one. Lost the match on this board.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Question: how was North supposed to bid?

After 5, assuming trumps break North can count 11 top tricks opposite ten high-card points. Seeing as South showed a better than minimum hand and has no kings, it doesn't seem unreasonable to play South for two queens which brings us to all the tricks.

e.g.
AQxxx
Qx
Qx
Axxx

How exactly was North supposed to involve South in the decision? Asking for kings isn't going to do much good!

FWIW I was South and I thought my role in getting to the poor grand was larger than my partner's.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For all dummy reversal enthusiasts:

At the table, I played 10, spade to J (all follow), AK, third heart. East discards a diamond as you ruff low.

How should declarer continue?
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We led K, dummy played 2, partner played 3, declarer Q.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nice one Paul. Very similar theme!
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you, Yehudit!
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cheers David. See you around this week!
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Appreciate it, Howard.
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cheers, Michael.
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Richard.

Regarding suit preference (and also in response to Patrick below): I believe it is standard to play that a definitive low or high card promises the Ace or King (or occasionally a void) so that partner doesn't make the mistake of leading away from the King when we have a singleton. I didn't fully explore this in the article, but I do believe it is something that regular pairs must discuss - unclear suit preference agreements are a disaster waiting to happen, IMO!

Likewise I agree with you that, given 6+ known cards in the suit to signal with, a slighter higher spade would be appropriate with a club singleton. With fewer cards in the suit we are signalling with, we have to give an ambiguous middle card and hope partner works out that ‘I need to have partner to have a singleton to beat the contract, so I’ll try swinging this Ace' (rather than ‘knowing’ we have a stiff).
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well done, John. The bridge world had needed a podcast for a while. Looking forward to more!
Feb. 11
1 2 3 4 5
.

Bottom Home Top