Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Rosenberg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Switching to a club is double dummy. There is zero reason to think spades are good and pretty good reason to think they're not.
Declarer's hand could easily be Jx, J10x, AJxx, AKQx. Or KJ, J10xx, Axx, KQJx. Or many other hands..

I think the only reasonable defenses are for East to try to cash hearts (playing partner to be unblocking) or duck the heart.
Nov. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They can have an absolute game force - you can have an absolute grand slam…
Nov. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So what would you do with my xxxxx, AKJx, AKJx, — example?
Nov. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul F: “Discussing this item with my partner is about 47,563 on the list.”

That's the point of default agreements - to cover stuff (obscure or otherwise) without needing to discuss the particulars.

I think it's amazing how many experts don't eem to have figured that out.
Nov. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is my default agreement. I think it's a good one.
Nov. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike M: “And the frequency of that?”

I have no idea. You said “Lead directing for if they bid 3NT, what else?”
I answered your question.

I guess you did not say what you meant to say.
Nov. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about xxxxx, AKJx, AKJx —? Partner having x, Qx, 10xxxxx, xxxx. You have a cold slam on normal breaks. Pity YOU couldn't get in the bidding.
Nov. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A personal experience of thia rare auction rates to be maybe once, at most twice. So how can anybody possibly know how “most people” play it?
Nov. 21
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok. But it doesn't really translate to the OP auction. For example, your 3 bid that shows and stoppers is not needed - responder already showed a stopper.
Nov. 20
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you mean you play this in general, or on the OP auction?
Nov. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bart: 1) There was one hand I solved really fast - because I'd seen the theme before. Something like KQ87x of trumps facing AJ9x and you lead low from dummy to to the 8 when RHO shows out. Of course, this means that my beating you on time might not have been fair - the hands were supposed to be ‘new’.

2) Have you researched who is right - this article or me? The article says we each got 9 hands completely right - I thought 8. And the article says you made three ‘errors’ while I made 4. While I thought I made 6 ‘errors’ and you made 5.
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes - I think it was called
“Untangling 3
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin R: Agreed. But then uou need some artificial bids. Just as, over 1-1M, 3 moat would play 3oM as naturalish, but the percentages say to play it as showing values.
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Timo: Not unreasonable. These are difficult areas. Partnershps (and non-partnerships) can only hope to survive. I would tend not to have strong criticism about bids made by my partner in this auction.
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Absolutely true. The question is whether opener should attempt to ‘use’ the cuebid to ameliorate the problem. I don't think the answer is clear.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can you name a form of classical Japanese musical drama?
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Frances H: Then I guess you don't buy the concept that 3 implies spade worry. How exactly is opener supposed to bid x, Qx, AKxxxxx, AKx?
I guess you could say that hand should bid 3 over 1N - but I'd be pretty nervous doing that without agreement.
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard R: Maybe so, but it's definitely a problem. Responder can have a ‘great’ hand facing 5-5 - but only so-so facing 4-card .
Nov. 19
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David B: That might be an issue. However, as has long been known, it's not always easy, in general, to ‘solve things’ over 3. Opener has only 3 bids that keep us below 3N, yet can have more than 3 ‘hand-types’. And using 3 as ‘2-way’ also usually comes with a flaw - even assuming anybody has such an agreement.

I don't think 2 should deny 3-card - but I can see thinking that 3 denies the ‘bulk’ of the hand is in spades. Maybe the OP hand is not extreme enough - I'm not sure. Maybe it has to be more like AKx and xxx. Or maybe KQJ and no J.
But what I AM certain of is that bidding 2 gives the partnership THREE more steps to sort things out. And making the most economical bid often helps matters.

If you bid 3, I think partner's 3 should be depicting spade worry (as I said above). But if opener bids 3 or 3!N over 31d, you have ‘lost’ the opportunity to show spade value below 3N.

I just thought somebody should mention the POSSIBILITY of bidding 2.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“But I am not at risk of playing a part score because almost everyone expects the bid is game forcing.”

Yes, I already said elsethread that the particular question of the OP is one where we needn't worry that much about partner passing - though there were a couple of experts who thought it was or should be NF - so not 100%. I like 100%.
And what about the many other auctions where some will think ‘same’ and others will think ‘different’?

I also said I suspected there was an element of BS in some of the answers. That some experts WOULD bid 3 on the OP auction on an invitational hand with 3-card (some 15-16 4-3-4-2 hands) - and then pass 3.

“The big difference between this auction and 1M 2M where invites have the same ”thread the needle“ feel is that on this auction, we can't be sure of strain yet, so thread the needle is harder.”

I'm not sure which you mean by “this auction” but I disagree either way. In each auction the strain could be NT or the major - and a minor suit contract is not impossible.
Nov. 19
.

Bottom Home Top