Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michal Czerwonko
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 117 118 119 120
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And there is a method to disambiguate a minimum from an invitational hand for the same bid! Works 100% in clubs.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see a reason to poll it. If systematically E may bid at the three level this hand, W is at fault. If not, E is at fault. Go discuss your system.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess it's not 2.83% since starting with short H allows picking Q 4th
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We will never reach a platonic ideal for disclosure. However, if the common set of rules should at least formally apply to both Meckwell and LOL-LOG pairs, the bar what constitutes a common knowledge that every player is assumed to posses should be set relatively low.
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Out of curiosity, what do you do bid with 5+ 4+ 10-15?
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Say, you buy the hand. Then how would you feel about counting the hands of your opponents without knowing that 3 bidder is 8+? It similarly applies to defending their or any contract played by 3 bidder. Apparently any bridge player would ask but still there may be situations when the reason to ask is less clear.
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Like W jumping in ?
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since X had nothing to do with , it's GF. I strongly prefer in for instance 1-2-X-P, 3 as a one round force
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I knew that before. I still don't see why I would exclude the q as the 8th
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why the q would deny ?
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There's never a perfect solution. In first sequence the q is reserved for big /+ hands and with also big mm hand it would be too crowded. It is also important that from the opener perspective, no fit has been found and natural 3 instead of a q helps find it fast if it exists. In second sequence, the opener holding 4m is reasonably assured about fit. Q-bid as a force allows distinguishing hands with less shape from hands that would jump to 4m to create a force. It is also availability of this jump that makes 3m as NF superior.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you have every trump spot in 5-3 fit, one direction is clearly better for 4-1 break
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lucky you with respect to sleeping venue choice after your partner spared you the indignity of 6N through her perfectly timed restraint!
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about 3343 or 3442?
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
W:
♠ AKW975
♥ 6
♦ AD8
♣ A98
E:
♠ D1086
♥ AW43
♦ 532
♣ KW

6 by W after K lead (RYSZARD KIEŁCZEWSKI blog on PBU site)
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd open first seat; now it's too likely 1 would preempt only the partner
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Availability of not serious 3N would help us to pass
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since Axx,AQJTx,KJTx,x and Ax,AQxxx,Kxxx,xx come from two different universes perhaps counting losers has too many flaws to be a serious decision rule
Oct. 17
Michal Czerwonko edited this comment Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Years ago I played a 4M hand correctly in this sense that I checked all possible chances. Then when everything failed, I commented ‘One down I guess’ and made the hand nevertheless by stumbling onto a double squeeze without a single thought of it. The two players I played against were not too happy; however, each of them had a chance of breaking the squeeze so perhaps it was not a full fix.
Oct. 16
Michal Czerwonko edited this comment Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you open 3, you can't go down in 6
Oct. 16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 117 118 119 120
.

Bottom Home Top