All comments by Mike Ma
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
C K, N encourages.
C J, N overtakes knowing S has KQJx
Small C to S 's Q. That must ask for a D, otherwise N would just let the C J hold.
D 3. Fortunately with 5 D on the board, N cannot misread this.
Cash C if declarer makes a mistake and ducks.
Oct. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff, opener may have 3 H but not good enough hand to X, while responder is the one to know our side has the BOP, but with only 2H. Now what?
Oct. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just because they have a 9 card fit does not mean they won't be down. What would 3S have done? Probably down 1? So if they double your side, 3S X is no better than 3H X MP wise. Hoe many MP would be have got if you pass 3H?

The 2-2 situation is always tricky in BOP X situation. Some extra care is needed when one X with a doubleton.
Oct. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think the H in and "belief that cards lie badly for them is necessary, as long as the BOP is not a bunch of quacks and nothing to say every finesse will work for them.
Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So Jeff you don't think - (P) - 2S - (3H) is a maximal overcall X situation?
Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me, there is not much difference between maximal overcall X (by opener) and BOP X. X says given responder's 2 bid, I think we have game if you have a good 2 hand. Opener won't X with a distributional hand. He will just have to decide whether to bid 3 or 4. So by default, opener has a somewhat balanced hand, which makes it same as BOP, except that you know your side has more than barely majority of points.
Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is MP and both red. If our side has BOP, and we are in an 8 vs 8 situation, then -140 and -730 probably is not that big of a difference given how the bidding went. But +200 vs. +100 when we would have had +110 makes a gigantic difference.
Oct. 20, 2016
Mike Ma edited this comment Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems like a classic BOP X to me. I show we have the balance of points. I should not have 4 unless I also have tricks. I should not have singleton .
Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How can it be maximal when R has denied invitational hand with the 2 bid?
Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What was 3?
Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“i don't think TABs are an effective tool after this start” were your words. So what start are you talking about? TAB is useful when you use it wisely, it is terrible if you use it foolishly. Disclaimer: I am not saying I know when you use it wisely. Give us examples of when TAB is used wisely and end up not effectively?
Oct. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How can you tell whether it is an effective tool without knowing what opener has? Opener has Qxxx, AKQxx, Ax, Kx. Is this an effective tool?
Oct. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When opener makes a TAB, his only concern is the length and strength of the trump suit and what round controls responder may have in the side suits. He is not interested in source of tricks. A really good example is from Wei-Anderson book, where the TAB discovers that they have a 9 card fit missing the A and K. Opener knowing they have everything else now bid 3NT. That may very well be the case of this hand too with your J high suit.

If opener makes a 1N beta/control ask, that is different. Now showing two good suits (which basically at the same time show more or less the number of controls and where they are) will allow opener to judge the hand better than just knowing number of A and K in your hand. However, it must be two good suits and no controls outside. This hand would not work because of the pathetic suit, and even the suit is missing at least a 10, and the K in .
Oct. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael, what I meant was that if 4-5 (including 4M, 5m) must always begin with Jacoby, that can make bidding slam with the right fit difficult.

Assuming one begins with 2, the problem with not having an agreement about which is trump suit after 1S - 2H - 3H - 3S is then it can be ambiguous whether 4D is a last train bid, and after 4H, if 4S is to play with 4-5 or another forward going bid.
Oct. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Frances, I don't disagree. I only point out that for many players, bidding (simple) Jacoby whenever they have 4+ trumps may not be so good an idea.
Oct. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Suppose responder has Kxxx, AQxxx, Ax, Kx and bids 2N Jacoby. Assuming we play simple Jacoby, opener with AQxxx, KJx, xxc, Qx rebids 4S. Slam is laydown. Will responder always feel comfortable to move beyond 4S?
Oct. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For the trump suit now, will be a control bid suit then, for the trumps they are a-changing.
Oct. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me, if we are still in the competitive jungle of seeing who will buy the contract below game level, X shows values and trump support, but not good enough or too much defense to bid 3. The QB does not make it their hand, what with all the upgrading people do. How else can partner figure out your side has 9 trumps if you can't X to show 3 now?
Oct. 12, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When responder bid 2NT, she deprived you of being able to bid 2NT naturally. The question is whether X of 2NT should include that hand or is it better to limit X of 2N to truly TO hand with short M and NT hand stronger than ordinary strong NT.
Oct. 12, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So there is no difference between X by responder in both sequence?
Oct. 12, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top