Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Ma
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 337 338 339 340
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ray, once a mind has gone bonkers, it will remain so until rebooted. :-)
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Craig, this has been explained to you many times in the comments. Opponents are forcing to 4, so 5 is bidding that over 4.
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dave, thanks. Of course it should be 4. Precision has advantages over 2/1 in some situations. The strange thing is Precision players who insist on keeping the oddities of 2/1.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
LOL. Obviously I am not talking about AK and AK in two side suits.
16 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tone deaf much?
17 hours ago
Mike Ma edited this comment 17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Suppose you have a 9 card M suit. Would you rather it be AKQJT98765 or AKQxxxxxx?
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
deleted
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The issue is not if 2 promises 5, it is what to do with 3=4=3=3 if partner opens 1. Playing Precision, this is a non-issue. Either bid 4 with opening hand or 1NT forcing with hand too strong or too many controls to bid 4.
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Craig, it may benefit you to look at your various comments to see their self-inconsistency.
Feb. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know why 1 - 1NT even came into the discussion. But thanks for clarifying your system.
Feb. 25
Mike Ma edited this comment Feb. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pete, you can't have it both ways. If 1 - 1 - !NT - 2 shows a better hand than ! - 2, then you can't make a “lead-directing” 1 bid before raising 1H.

Note the difference between 1 opening vs. 1 response to 1m opening. With 1 opening, you are looking at one 8 card M vs. another. With 1 response, you are looking at possibly 7 card fit vs. potential 8 card fit. Playing in a 7 M fit while having a 8 m fit is fine, but not 7 M vs. 8 M.
Feb. 24
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Marty, I never said 3 should be default. But we agree there has to be a default, even if it is rare. If you think 3 is best default, that is fine. If I have to choose between 2NT w/o stopper and 3 with 3, I would choose 3. However, as I commented previously, if the overcall was 2, then I would be concerned about 3 promising 3 only. I don't know what the solution is, but we need to recognize some hands are problematic.

This situation actually happened at a club game some weeks ago. Opener bid 3 with 3, and his partner bid 5, and it was a 4-3 fit. Obviously, this pair did not recognize/agree the need of a default bid and what it should be.
Feb. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you sure you are not confusing this with raising 1 opening to 2 with 4 ?
Feb. 24
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2345 is a stopper? :-)
Feb. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Craig, By assumption, both sides have found fit. The criteria you list are about whether you should let them play or you should play. The relative strengths tell whether it is your hand or their hand, which as I said, does not mean you will make and they will go down. Bidding is not perfect. If you know you can't set their 3 in spite of 25 points to their 15, but if you bid 3, you will go down 2 red, of course you will pass. But if you don't even know if your side has 25 or 15, how can you make any judgement,

My earlier comment already mentioned factor like double fit etc and implicitly LoTT.
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ellis, so if they spread the cost by passing the CC fees to everyone, you complain. But if they don't, like in screen tax, 6 people team etc, you complain. So which is it?
Feb. 23
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unless 3 over 2 is played as natural and invitational, I do play 3 over 3 as NF if 3 is. It is just one of those awkward hands. Sometimes your survive, somethings you don't.
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BOP is the starting point in the evaluation. Of course the more the point discrepancy, the more solid is the starting point. Your comment about 7 affect more the decision as to whether to sit the double than whether to double. In a comment above, I discussed how N should look at their side's defensive capability and offensive capability to make the decision NOT to sit the double.

If NS does not have the BOP, should they compete over 3 with an 8 card trump fit? Even if 4 is right in that it will be down 1, how can they know they aren't pushing opponents into 4 making?
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Len, balance of points. Say you have 23, are you going to let opponents play undoubled with their 17? Of course, there are times when they can make and your side can't at the level in question, so it is a primary stage decision, with higher stage adjustments.
Feb. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is MP. Partner's 4 has taken the space from investigation abut fitting values. Slam will be a stretch. You have as good as chance of getting a good score playing 4 as getting to a thin slam.
Feb. 22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 337 338 339 340
.

Bottom Home Top