Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Shuster
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suppose you might want to try to distinguish:
1 - (P) - 2 - (3) -
3 - (4) - 4 - (5) -
6

From

1 - (P) - 2 - (3)
3 - (5) - P - (P)
6

The bottom auction is very clearly natural to me. The top is a torture bid.

Zia talks about slippage… where one suit is agreed, but at the 6-level a new strain is offered.

And I'm with Marty; I generally use 5NT to ask for strain, possibly including a new strain.
Dec. 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“No new suits at the 6-level” is a terrible rule. The 6-level is not the 4-level.
Dec. 23, 2019
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, it depends on how likely we think the other table is to wind up in 3NT or a partscore. I'd expect vs. many opponents to have a positive expectation for 5.
Dec. 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just curious… what will you do over 4?
Dec. 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doubling the B-level club players who probably ignored the vul and will butcher the play. I'd pass in a real event.
Dec. 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday on the calendar. A secular opportunity to be with family and neighbors. I'm with Adam here. My family was not pleased that I traveled to NABCs on Thanksgiving day (I've skipped the previous 12 fall NABCs, but attended this one because of the Soloway)

This is not the way to attract and keep younger players. It is very much an anti-family schedule and the fact it is seems to be intractable is very frustrating.

Wouldn't a compromise be possible, where some fall NABCs are scheduled outside of the holiday?
Dec. 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Having not bid NT earlier, we have to do so now with a probable length stopper.
Dec. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I usually prefer 3 as both minors, blocking.
Dec. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not to mention diamonds, hearts, spades, and notrump.
Dec. 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
50% of the respondents are saying forcing and 14% are in the “other” camp. I make the “obviously” comment for you and Francois out as obvious overbids.
Dec. 15, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Easy strategy: Bid 3 now. Discuss the nature of 2 after the session.
Dec. 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Scott, I bet you have it backwards.
Dec. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul, grabbing a shovel, digging a deeper hole. It's OK, the hole was already past your head.
Dec. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An always unbalanced 1 opener can be played as forcing, too, if you like.
Dec. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bids stick together, too.
Dec. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is pretty simple, the director allowed the change of call when he shouldn't. Thereby, a table result was achieved through a bad ruling. The score then had to be adjusted, but with director error, both sides are treated as the non-offending side.
Dec. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I understand you don't want to embarrass people by giving out specifics, but it is hard to accurately assess the validity of the claim without them.

Returning your cards to the board implies agreement with the claim. But either defender can object. Once the next board has been started, then the rules for adjusting the claim are different (more about returning to equity)

In your story, I do not hold much sympathy for the declarer who claimed without being able to articulate a line of play, and at the first sign of resistance decided the contract was down (when it might not be.)
Dec. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the hand still requires “careful play,” then don't claim. If it is to complex to discuss how you'll handle different defenses in one sentence, don't claim.

Once there is a claim, both defenders should face their hands. If they disagree with the claim, the director should be summoned. One defenders agreement is not binding on the other.
Dec. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you X'd, they might get to slam from the other side. Your hand has a normal diamond lead, which makes it easy. I led a diamond (against 4.) Our teammates made a *Positive* 2 response to a 2 opener, simultaneously guaranteeing that they got to the slam and would get there from the wrong side. Opponents at the other table failed to lead the dangerous diamond honor and instead led a passive club. Annoying that passive lead from one side lets it make, passive lead from the other side beats it.
Dec. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was sitting there trying to figure out what more I needed for 7, since he was telling me he could count 12 in NT (I thought)
Dec. 10, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top