Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Ma
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
6 is fine. The point is what you would do if they bid 7 over your 6. If you make a forcing P, would partner think you need AK for 7?
July 30, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The textbook advice is if you have long trumps with honor, especially the A, play the forcing game. If you have long and small trumps, go for the ruff. With a suit headed by the J, you will need a lot from partner even if the forcing game is right.
July 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The crucial card is the A. How does your sequence tells partner you need the A from him but nothing else?
July 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I said, I cannot judge the evaluation of bidding 7, as that is above my pay grade. I only comment on the 2 bid making opener expecting a red suit doubleton from responder if 2 (strongly) promises 3.
July 28, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is not my place to figure why N bid to 7 the way he did, since both N are like 1000 times the player I am. OTOH, give S a red suit doubleton with the same high cards, and 7 is quite decent a contract. Given his void, should N not expect a red suit doubleton more than a 3334 hand from S? Plus, their partnerships may have other ways to bid 3334 hand, so that 2 ruled that out?
July 28, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pro: right side 3NT, lets partner in on your S support.

Con: partner gets overly excited ( as was the case), playing 4S when partner has holdings in the red suits that makes 3N lay down but 4S down.

I don't disagree that 2S may be a better bid than 2N, but if partner always assume you have 3 trumps, it may not be such a good thing. And if partner can't, subsequent bids may be awkward.
July 28, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just wonder what people think of the 2 bid by S over 2. He has no good bid, and perhaps AJ is as good as a lot of 3 card support, but a 2N would have slowed things down.
July 28, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Finding out about the Q is crucial. Yes, you can begin with Texas, and if partner does not have the Q, put it in 6N. 6 is a red herring, because it will be a very rare hand where you can make 6 but not 6N. However, should opener not assume you have 6 if you Texas? And so if he has 4 trumps without the Q, would he not answer he has the Q due to the extra length?

That is why the best is to begin with Jacoby and then bid 4 as KC. The one glitch is you have to agree beforehand on the Q ask and what bid asks about K.
July 27, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He doesn't know W has only 2 , or for that matter, how many tricks W needs. For all he knows, W has 5 .
July 26, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Edit. 1N - 2 - 2 - 4 (KC) - 4 (3) - 4 (Q ?) - 4N (No) - 6N. You know you have enough for 6N, and no need for pick a slam knowing partner is missing Q.
July 26, 2014
Mike Ma edited this comment July 26, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He had to play T too if he had QT, which is what Steve was pointing out.
July 26, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it is perfectly reasonable for 4 to be NF in this auction. The 4SF bid is used to look for potentially 3 and/or stopper(s) for 3NT in opener's hand, in addition to other hand types. There is a big difference between 9 tricks and 11 as opposed to 9 vs. 10, so I think it is unreasonable when failing to find 3NT, one must contracts for 11 tricks.

The bid that should be forcing is 4 directly over 2, a GF hand in with slam interest. Invitational hands would bid 3 (I am aware that may be courteous raise).
July 26, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree completely that the partnership should work out the entire interference structure if they are going to play Precision 1, and that includes what hand type(s) the XX should show, not the points. In addition, most books/notes only tell you what to do after the first overcall, not what to do when advancer also bids.
July 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And many times we end with something worse, because we don't even bother to understand the original idea. How many incarnations have there been with the same P vs. 1D. vs XX structure? Why? All these top pros who spend their entire day thinking and playing bridge don't know what they are doing?
July 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why does everybody want to re-invent the wheel? The original scheme, P = 0-5, 1D = 6-7, XX = 8+, and other bids by agreement (GF or “negative FB”) works just as well as anything else I have seen, why not just play that as default barring explicit agreement otherwise?
July 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Franky, how many times has it happened that you have either the LR+ hand or the preemptive hand after 1m - X?
July 21, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me rebidding 2 instead of bidding 2 with 5 is awkward and counter-productive whether playing SA or 2/1. There is a difference between 2 and 3, because you do not take up any space with 2.
July 21, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner pulls, it will be your side getting -300/500 rather than the opponents.
July 21, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BW on the first hand is fine, but second hand, do you really want partner to bid 6 with K?
July 20, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Anyone who bids 3 like this has got to hate his partner.
July 20, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top