Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Paul Block
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did notice that LHO is the 2 bidder; however, I have 10 hcp and partner made some noise (he must have a face card over there). Even if all of the finesses are working, it looks to me like the opps are going to need to be doing some ruffing. Additionally, partner's bid will likely have them misguessing any two-way choices that they have.

@Anant can you imagine the opponents not having the Q given your hand and this auction?
March 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sign me up for the speculative double. I'm hoping the defense goes: heart to the ace, heart ruff, diamond to the ace, and a heart through for the uppercut… or it's -790 when declarer or dummy is void in diamonds and partner doesn't have a club trick.
Feb. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I bid 6. It's really hard to come up with a hand that's consistent with partner's bidding where 6 is not on ice. Yes, bidding is indicated by partner's tank, but I don't think that pass is a logical alternative. Hopefully, when the director polls those he believes to be my peers they'll feel the same.
Feb. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I balance more than most people with less than most people, and I wouldn't consider balancing here (particularly given the colors, form of scoring, knowledge that partner doesn't have an opening bid, and most of my strength in the opponent's suit).
Feb. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You haven't taken into account that CHO may get involved in the action after your 6 call.
Feb. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“when seeing such a gentile looking group”

I must have missed the crucifixes. I'll have to re-watch the video.
Feb. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How does partner judge their hand when the action proceeds:
- , - , p , p
p , 1, 3 , x
5 ?

It seems to me that partner will have a much easier time if they know that I have 5 spades. I wish some of my honors were in that suit, but as The Stones sang, “You can't always get what you want.”

Edited to try to get the format to look reasonable.
Feb. 6, 2016
Paul Block edited this comment Feb. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for humoring me. While results don't necessarily vindicate one bid over another, I still enjoy hearing what happened.
Feb. 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You wrote:

“Esther came down to tell us that the gambling charges had been dropped; we would get our passports returned shortly and the 5,000b bail money would be refunded.”

Are you optimistic that you'll renew acquaintance with your 5,000b or have you written it off?
Feb. 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was originally thinking of passing, but the worst hand that I could come up with for partner is:
kxxx
ax
x
kqtxxx
Since that hand easily (assuming no club ruff) makes 4 (and I actually expect partner to be slightly better than this) I guess i'd better bid 4.
Feb. 1, 2016
Paul Block edited this comment Feb. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, enough time has passed. What was the story with this hand?
Jan. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So far, 43 voters and 11 alternative bids. I can't remember seeing poll results like this.
Jan. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't have bid 2, but now I'm happy I did.
Jan. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My thought is that both John and Jeff both did their best to come up with logical alternatives. It appears that Jeff's logical alternatives were “pass” and 3. Of these he judged that “pass” was most likely to be suggested by the BIT, based on that determination, he chose 3.

On the other hand, it appears that John viewed his logical alternatives as 3 or 4. Of these, he viewed 3 as more likely to be suggested by the break in tempo. He, therefore, chose 4.

Nothing is amiss here. They both made their best effort to comply with the law. All we can do is make our best judgement in these cases. I didn't mean to imply that it's simple and that my judgement will always be the same as yours or John's or Jeff's, but it's doable and the rules (and active ethics) require it of us.
Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Ray - You make it sound like considering your logical alternatives is rocket science. I think most of us can look at a bridge problem and have a pretty good chance of determining which alternatives our peers would consider. We don't need to conduct our own poll to make an educated guess. Will we be surprised sometimes that an alternative to which we gave only passing consideration is particularly popular? Absolutely, but that doesn't mean the law doesn't require it.

Determining which of the LAs are suggested by the BIT is more challenging, but similarly required and usually not terribly difficult.

In this case, as many have pointed out, the meaning of the BIT is ambiguous (although I'm with Jeff that it almost certainly shows 3-card support), so it's not surprising that thoughtful people might disagree about their ethical obligation.

John can certainly speak for himself - and he did not mention this - but I'm guessing that one of the things that troubles him about the invitational 3 bid is that the bid is the most flexible alternative. As in situations where “double” is an alternative following a BIT, we often want to avoid that call. When we know partner has a problem, making a flexible bid that lets them clarify seems less ethical than making a more decisive call.

Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I bid 4NT asking for key cards.”

Per OP you'd be asking for aces.
Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner knows the kinds of hands that I open and still seems confident of taking 9 tricks. Who am I to doubt him?
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are so many hands with which I'd balance 3 that aren't nearly the peer of this beauty; I feel like I need to do something different (especially at IMPs). 4 is an option, but I prefer not foreclosing the possibility of finding another strain. Clearly, I won't be thrilled if partner decides to defend 2x, a not entirely unlikely scenario, but I'll take the risk.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm surprised that there's not more love for a trump lead. Where else are declarer's tricks coming from?
Jan. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We're vulnerable at IMPs. Why can't partner have a balanced 14 count? If partner took our pass as encouraging maybe she just took a chance and bid game. Perhaps:

KTxx Axx xxxx AQ
or
AKxx Jxxx KJx QT
or even
Axx Axx KJxxx Qx

I do see where you're coming from. Partner might bid exactly the same with the 1.5nt hand.

Maybe we should have bid 4 last time. That would unambiguously show better than a minimum and let partner take control if slam is in the picture.

As of now, there haven't been any abstentions - other than the author - so no one seems to have found the pass too objectionable.
Jan. 24, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top