Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nick Warren
1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 27 28 29 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If your partner claims 1-1-1-2 is gf, what do they propose to do with something like x-Q9xx-JTxxxx-KJ (or similar) and you're not playing Walsh?
Jan. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I share your frustration, but I'm with Kit's position on this.

One can only do one's best and rely on either 1) that the opps are not “secretary birds” or b) the common sense of the director.

Jan. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It depends on vul and scoring a little (not much actually). It also depends a little on partner's tendency to upgrade 14 counts (some can do it too enthusiastically). etc. That said, I probably blast game with all 10s, any 9s that are not badly flawed and some 8 counts (for example I think it is losing bridge to invite on 8 with a 6 card minor - these tend to roll in with 9 tricks or fail to make 8).

If inviting, I would be a tad less than that (about half to one point less). Less than that we may as well play 1NT.

It is quite playable to design your system with no balanced invite at all - just blast 3NT or sit for 1. You'll lose when partner would have accepted and 9 tricks roll in. You'll break even when partner refuses and at least 8 tricks come in. But you gain when partner accepts and 9 tricks don't come in. You also gain when 7 tricks is the limit of the hand. If using invites it gains very little indeed, if that and you can use the invite sequence for something else.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, I have no idea what caused the BIT. It could have been caused by one of a number of things as listed above. Therefore I have no real idea of what is suggested. Therefore I bid my hand with no further thought and my hand is, I think, an invite.

If one of the opps think otherwise and want to call the director, then let the director sort it out. That is what we have directors for. I will not be ashamed of my actions.

In general I find these BIT questions extraordinarily hard to sort out in my head at the table in any sort of time frame that does not cause a further BIT. The law is fine in principle - in practice I find it impossible to apply it in a way that does not cause further problems (unless it is an obvious case of a long pause then pass suggesting values)
Jan. 26, 2016
Nick Warren edited this comment Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Rainer, I agree that there many trade offs in choosing/designing a system.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I could interject here… The question of opening all balanced 11s (and for that matter poor 12 counts) along with a 14-16NT doesn't sit well with 2/1 gf methods IMO, as you've suggested. (Well, not without serious consideration to what it does to the rest of your system anyway. Playing transfers over 1 with transfer completion showing a weak NT hand is one option).

But, you don't have to open balanced 11 counts. You could just have your 1NT rebid as 12, 13, with maybe some bad 14 counts.

(P.S. You don't have to play 2/1 GF either!)
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've played a range of a reasonable 14 to a bad 17 with nf 1NT response to 1x. It plays well IMO.

Though I have to add the caveat that I was playing more British style opening 2 bids - which lowers the ceiling of 1x openers by about a point. Which in turn means that responder doesn't need to scrape together reponses on complete rubbish like I see so many American pairs doing. The 2NT rebid being a reasonable 17 opposite 6 is not so hair raising then.
Jan. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't agree that 95% of posts concern screens. And I am happy to leave it to those with more experience of screens than I have to decide whether they want to keep them or not.

However, there is a grain of truth to your general point. Possibly the answer is if people made more use of the intermediate forum.
Jan. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Excellent story.
Jan. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, I left this one up for long enough. Don't read on if you don't want the spoiler.









Declarer rose with A and took the losing trump finesse. North then lead x, taken by South with K, who then played a third round of s. North, who had started with KTx, couldn't be prevented from taking a second trump and, along with A, there were 4 losers. Holding up A at trick one snips the defenders communication. Beginners books are full of similar examples in NT contracts, but this is a good example, I think, from a suit contract.
Jan. 22, 2016
Nick Warren edited this comment Jan. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The scenario is academic as I too would not have reopened with X.

Another thing to keep in mind is not to beat yourself up too much over missing/messing up a penalty opportunity - provided that you've taken reasonable action to obtain the best score with your own cards. (In words, 3 was the bid, not X).
Jan. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
*IF* I would have decided to show shortness, I wouldn't feel unhappy about repeating the message if it is first round control (single A or void).

However, I would have looked for a better initial rebid in the first place as partner will downgrade holdings like KQx, which is probably wrong if my shortage is actually a stiff ace.
Jan. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you'll find in the matter of Bridgemates displaying results, it is all done from the Bridgemate hardware/software. Your scoring program (ACBLScore or Scorebridge or whatever) has nothing to do with it.
Jan. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yep. Norway has its attractions. Though they tell me that, despite the fact that, like the UK, it is warmer than it should be for how far north it is (Gulf Stream), it is still damn cold in winter.
Jan. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't agree. If a club offers a host, it offers that service full stop. If it doesn't then you usually don't get a game unless you're lucky and if you're lucky why should you be punished relative to the other players

P.S. In clubs with a playing director, players will often want to play with that person because, a] typically, they are at least as good at the rest of the field or b] the playing director is their regular partner anyway in my experience
Jan. 19, 2016
Nick Warren edited this comment Jan. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was a club game, MPs.

NS were vul, which I did enter, but the software has not shown due to me not entering NS hands, nor wishing to invite comment about the full auction.

The 2 overcall would not have been to everyone's taste, though not as wild as I have seen in a club MP environment.
Jan. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some diseases (well polio anyway) became more serious when we got better sanitation due to lack of exposure to the pathogen. IMO one can be too worried about being clean.
Jan. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't like to estimate. As has been pointed out, 3N or 4 could be making. Partner could have pre-empted a 6 card suit. We might have 3 club losers.

There again 5 may well be a make and no other game is. In which case we gain, not lose. Trusting partner to have a decent pre-empt for a vul 2nd seat bid like that (I would), then I think 5 is likely to be gaining not losing.
Jan. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming I genuinely have no clue as to whether to drop or finesse, I prefer the old adage of “8 ever 9 never” - which is a rule based on statistics!

But a lot of the time you do have at least a small clue. Maybe not a very big clue and following it could be wrong, but a clue none the less.
Jan. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Personally I prefer to play in the more tightly run type of game. But obviously I am not everyone. Can't we allow both types of game to exist - and shades of grey in between and just let people vote with their feet.
Jan. 18, 2016
1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ... 27 28 29 30
.

Bottom Home Top