Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Ma
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I stand corrected.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know why 16. Opening 1m is a definite disadvantage.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul, have you noticed that you are the only one holding BBO to any responsibility on this matter?
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not surprised that table score stood. S is free to pass forcing bids any time she feels like. However, they should keep a record of the frequency of psyche and partner fielding it correctly.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Change xx to xx then you truly have a difficult hand.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is easy to see that if 3 is invitational hand.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So partner has 8+ cards in the m. If she has 5 , she will sit for the X. If she has 5+ , she will be able to bid 3 or maybe 2 with 5 and 2. So the only problematic hand is 3=2=4=4. She will have to decide between sitting the X and bidding 2. Since opponents have 8 card fit in that situation, playing 2 on 5-2 fit is not against LoTT per se.

Passing 2 X when you know the suit is breaking 4-1 (hopefully opener is not void) is good in both MP and IMPS. MP, you have two ways to win. IMPS, if they make it is not a disaster.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not believe there is such a thing as too strong for splinter in 2/1 auction. The usual objections to not doing it responding to a 1M opening do not apply. You have already shown a suit, and bidding 3 is not much more space saving compared to 4.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The JS method works fine if it denies 4 M. But if not, then 2 over 1 creates a little problem with opener bidding (not unremedifiable of course). But 2 showing limit raise (no 4 M) has problem also of course. All in all, single raise showing LR and JS showing GF raise is probably most economical.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael, picture bid tells the story even better here.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
First, because you are playing Bergen, you no longer can bid both weak and invitational hands. So you must first decide which hand 3 shows.

Anyway, is the danger suit, so 3 asks for stopper. It tends to show stopper, but it does not guarantee it, although I would have a tough time finding a hand without in this auction. So none of your options really apply.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just as I repeatedly have said, often it is not upgrading, it is a bid for tactical obstructive purpose. All we have to see is which hands people would “upgrade” first seat vs. 3rd seat NV to know that is the real reason.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are sponsors and there are sponsors. Sponsors who gave money and did not get anything in return may be able to sue for money back. Sponsors who hired cheats as clients have no cause to sue unless they are prepared to give up their titles.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Acceptable” does not = “Disallowed” or “Illegal”.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robert, suppose W did balance with a X. How could E tell that their holding is 4=4=3=2 instead of a more likely 4=2=3=4 or even 4=1=3-5?
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was stated in the OP that 2 was forcing. I asked why S passed, including that there were vibes from E as one of the possible reasons. However, I very much doubt this is the first time this happened.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 2 was forcing, why did S pass? Good judgement? Intuition? Vibes from E?
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The common scheme of using 2 as GF and 3 as limit raise has a serious problem when opener wants to accept the invitation, but does not have the stoppers to bid 3NT. Using 2 as GF raise (and presumably 2 as limit raise) is a big improvement in that regard.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Brad, I am saying that this hand illustrates that sometimes things are not so simple. Red suit cards are good for taking tricks, but they are not so good for preventing losing tricks quickly.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You should also count if you are going to lose 4 tricks before you can cash your 10.
Dec. 8
.

Bottom Home Top