Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Shuster
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have 6 HCP and 10 losers. Partner is a passed hand. The opponents are about to play a minor suit partial. Color me content.
Nov. 1, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Right, missed that. So one threatening lead from each side, but as a practical matter it is being declared from South.
Oct. 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also, 6 is almost cold (is cold from North, good luck going that though)
Oct. 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
10 cards in two suits is a no-go. I don't think anyone would buy the that it is a psyche. Your partner would probably put forth the case it is a terrible bid.
Oct. 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, I think many of the South bashers have made a great case for North also being to blame. South showed 5=?=4=? but the heart holding is less then 3, else they'd've patterned with 3. So South must hold at least two clubs.
Oct. 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How light does the pair overcall?
Oct. 30, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've seen hundreds of missed slams on set-ups like this in a 2/1 context: Each partner has something extra and no convenient way to show it. Inevitably someone bids 3NT and it ends there. When constructing your 2/1 methods, it is important to have some way to show extra values.

For example, in Lawrence style 2/1, openers rebid above 2M shows extra values, so after 1 - 2; opener could bid 2NT to show a non-minimum with stoppers (diamonds can still be recovered if responder bids them.) That comes with a price: The 2M rebid no longer shows a 6th piece.

So it looks like at least some of the fault falls agreeing to a 2/1 style where no one was able to show extra values in a convenient manner.
Oct. 29, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think South should probably jump to 3 (or maybe 3NT) over 2 to get extras across. 2 was a false economy.

I don't buy that 2 is 4SF in a 2/1 auction, but whatever.

North with a 4 loser hand should risk 4 over 3NT given the superb suit quality. I was very close to voting North 75%, because I think moving over 3NT is more obvious than jumping on the second round, but eventually decided the errors were equivalent. I'm surprised by the south skew in the votes.
Oct. 29, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
See Kevin's comment above as well. 10 losers is more than partner will expect, even if 3 were to carry the non-standard definition.
Oct. 28, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's a sideshow, but I think the East hand should choose 4. The odds of a useful pitch are small, but the possibility of stripping the hand to prevent a heart loser are substantial; so long as spades are trump. It is another case of 4-4itis. As a happens the RNG of the deal determined that 4 is a very good contract.
Oct. 28, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is a very good chance partner has a balanced hand inappropriate for a 1NT overcall. If the reason is that he has too much strength, a 2 call is going to beget 3NT.

After that, there is no recovery, we are in -200+ land whatever you do. For now, pass and await further developments.
Oct. 28, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, explanation time. On another bridge list, I was in an argument with a player who voted to bid 5 over 1 with 10 solid spades and 11 tricks in hand, explaining it as showing a diamond void and asking for aces.

I thought that 5 would probably end the auction. He said that only an idiot would think 5 is natural. Color me idiot. (on the actual deal, opener was very long in diamonds and no one else would be able to tell you didn't have a hand like this, too)
Oct. 28, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you need partner to play a certain card, then when the director is called you don't get that trick.
Oct. 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It isn't “Never preempt over a preempt.”

It is “You cannot preempt over a preempt.”
Oct. 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
DD sim is exactly the wrong way to evaluate 1NT openers with stiff K and stiff Q, as the opponents never underlead their honor holdings (or insert a spot from third hand.)

Stiff A holdings for NT is only interesting if you compare it with other likely contracts arrived at by not opening 1NT (including 3NT)
Oct. 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about if a defender asks dummy “Is your partner a sneaky card player?” Or “Does he know a lot about squeezes?” I think these types of questions aren't matters of partnership agreement, so do not fall under the disclosure umbrella.

However, there are matters that do. For example, an agreement that aces are frequently underled vs suit contracts.
Oct. 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Stiff ace is a negative” doesn't go nearly far enough to demonstrate my feelings about it. I interpret such an action as deliberate sabotage of the partnership. It is trying to not win.
Oct. 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East should have explained that he didn't take 4 as kickback. If it was the pro that failed to do so, thumb screws. The client probably didn't know better, but if they can document that it was a mistaken bid (they probably can't) then I'd award a PP for the difference anyways.

The ethical players will always disclose the bidding misunderstanding before the opening lead.
Why should they be in a worse position than sleezeballs?
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Spades are 4-4. There is no asking bid for the diamond ace, so might as well just bid 3NT, since it will usually make.
Oct. 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 MINUTES?!? I'd not double if it came back in the normal 10 seconds, so maybe I'm the wrong person to ask. But 3 mins for the first bid; I'd think you need to call a doctor and check for a pulse.
Oct. 15, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top