Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Ma
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is her teammates that called her adorable, not she calling herself.
Aug. 21, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mario, how about showing us the actual hands so we can see what this is all about.
Aug. 20, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1) And if you are right playing for the drop, you will be ahead of the field. If you have additional information they don't have, you should use it.

2) The article explicitly asked not to consider the rest of the hand and only the trump suit. While we all agree that the significance of the J cannot be determined without the context of the bidding and the rest of the hand, and finessing or dropping, while right in general, can be wrong within the context of the hand.

By the way, your 1) and 2) seem to contradict each other.
Aug. 20, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps defense should wonder why you did not hold up.
Aug. 20, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am guessing this is another Versace bid that Mario is posting here. And in the companion poll about strength and length of 2, the actual hand must be quite abnormal.
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Simplest is just to use whatever you use against their 1NT opening.
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think partner should have bid 4 instead of 3 with that hand.
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you play the K, promising the Q, your partner will really appreciate you. First if he has Jxx, he knows a continuation will set the contract. If he does not have that, he knows that you need both m K's to have a chance, which from the bidding he pretty much knows you have anyway. If he has the J, he know a switch will do the job. Missing that, he will switch to the m he thinks declarer has a void in. If any doubt, he will switch to a because that gives declarer a guess if that is his void, while declarer cannot go wrong with a switch if that is his void.

If you have !Jxx, then you should encourage . Normal play would be the 10. Although here 2 is weird, since a preference does not make much sense.

There are of course in between situations, like if E has the T, and can't know if you have KQJ (where he should switch to ) or just KQ (where he should switch to the correct m). Or he has Txx, so a singleton J from you would do it if he forces dummy to ruff.
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What about 4 making and 5 down 1?
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry for my imprecision.
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are comparing apples to oranges. “Don't invite over an invite” refers to an invitational raise and then a further invitational raise, not when you are bidding new information.
Aug. 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand your thinking. If by “next deal”, you mean 1N will be passed out, that is fine. Even if doubler has 4 , that may still be the better contract. If what you mean is the level when it comes back to you is past 2, nothing in the hands indicate that may be so. All signs point to this will be a contest of partials.

If they somehow push you to bid 2, I don't see how after the 1NT bid, partner will think you only have 3 spades and bid instead of willing to defend (X or P). More importantly, if he thinks you only have 3, so what? You don't want to declare at the 3 level anyway.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you bid 1N now, you can bid 2 later. If you bid 1 now, you cannot bid 2N later.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Given the article and Mike Bodell's post are mostly about themselves making mistakes, and not some uncompetitive players, and more than anything it points to how important endurance is in F2F bridge, I really don't see your conclusion. But that may be just me, and I will leave it at that.

I do not stay away from BBO because I think the competition is inferior, but for other reasons. I am really not interested in the which is more difficult to get points debate.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, I don't see how you come to that conclusion. It shows that in F2F game, it is very difficult to maintain concentration. And that is because you cannot pick and choose when you play. I cannot and won't comment on BBO robot tournaments because my knowledge of it is 0.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you open a strong 1NT, you are not bargaining for 9 tricks unless partner cooperates. That is not to say bidding 3NT is wrong when there is no better option :-) Here X is the better option.

The one bid you don't want to hear from partner if you X is 4, but even there, may be he has 5+ . There are a lot of hands where he has 4 spades where you can make 4 (e.g. xxxx, AQx, xx, xxx), while 3NT has no play and worse, maybe goes down a lot. Unilateral 3NT bid is unnecessary when you have a little risk X, which can reap high reward.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The relative difference when they have 4 trumps between specifically J and specifically QJ holdings is about 4% (48% vs. 52%) if there is zero knowledge of the other cards. So that is easily changed by tiny perturbations, including 95% as opposed to 100% probability of leading J from QJ.

A more complete analysis would include what I called P_2 vs P_1 in my later post.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suspect it is more like 1 allows them to find their 4-4 heart fit.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The point is partner shows a good suit, Axxx is not a good suit. With holdings like Axxxx or AQxx (and those are really not that good), you have some play. But without the A, you have no play.

I will play 7 opposite AKxx. If break 3-0 the wrong way, so be it. It makes no sense to imagine the worst scenario unless the bidding overwhelmingly tells you that is what is happening.
Aug. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1) Since it is not given that 4m is Minorwood, we assume it is natural.

2) We do not “invite” over an “invite”. Also goes with the philosophy that it is in general counterproductive to stop on a dime in 4m unforced unless it comes from a failed search for 3NT.

3) 3 would show stopper(s) so partner can bid 3NT with stopped. You need that so you cannot use it as a temporizing bid.

4) How does responder know opener has a good hand to bid 4 over 2 with Hx?

5) With Jx, responder can make a decision about whether to bid 4 or 5. With Kx, he should always bid 4.
Aug. 18, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top