Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Paul Grünke
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
South could bid 4NT over 3 to describe values and stopper in .
March 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Did you beat 5H?
March 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very difficult to decide this post mortem. But I cannot really imagine he would bid the slam without a single keycard.
Jan. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partners hand was:
QT8754
-
KT32
KQ3

So the slam is excellent since you can play on 1-1 and if the King does not drop, you can eliminate and and play for split honors.
Jan. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my partnership, 5 would certainly have asked for control in this situation.
Jan. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this can be improved in the following way:
Over 5:
5NT = guarded King
6 = stiff
6 shows a first round control in and answers a question for keycards only counting those outside clubs.
Dec. 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Could you not also have something like 1336, looking for a major fit first?
Aug. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess it would be intersting to know what the correct explanation of the 6 bid was. If there was a missunderstanding this might be difficult to find out. As the bidding went, void in seems to be a reasonable explanation of the 6-bid. In that case you would have gotten the correct explanation and there would be no grounds for a change of result.
Unless you want to take away the 6 bid, but that seems strange, since it was a bad bid to make and gave you a chance for a good result.
March 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If opener continues with 4, how often will partner bid 4 here and be wrong?
Jan. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This seems to be a real borderline hand. Does vulnerability matter here? Would you rather bid nonvuln vs nonvuln?
Dec. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought leading the King from AK, if you have singleton in a side suit would be considered standard. Leading clubs seems fine, but I would therefore choose the K to avoid disambuigty about the holding.
Nov. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Which opener hands should bid 4 on this auction?
Aug. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner will almost always have four hearts, sometimes 5. I would have bid 4, if RHO had passed, but I thought that, 3 X would on on average result in a better MP score. With the opponents bidding to the 3-level with what seems to be 16 points at most, I expected bad breaks in 4 and maybe even a start of A, ruff.
June 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The first double was takeout, the second one just showed points.
June 29, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are right. But so is the article.
March 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Action double would make sense here if 2 would be non-forcing, constructive. With the 2-bidder not being limited in any way, an action double does not work and and I think 4X should be the contract.
July 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner might have some extra offence and double. Then I would bid 5.
July 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not like the 2-bid at all. But I dont think passing over 4 can be a good a decision by West.
March 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This line will work in many other layouts as well when ruffing the 3rd low wins. If you want to play on the it seems to me, that ruffing the high is the better play, because in the 4-2-case, it is more likely that the 10 is with the doubleton .
A combination of both lines might be best however. Win the in hand, play a to the ace and play a from dummy. If this loses, you can still go back to playing on (the ruffing line, not the finesse). This loses on some of the 4-1-lines, if they force you with a second , but you are in a very good position if the A is onside.
Feb. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can not understand how passing can be right here. Three players already believe 1 is not making and there is really not much in my hand that suggests otherwise.
I think 1 + XX is slightly better than 1NT + XX, because this way, we could also play 1NT X if we decide that this is the best spot for us.
Nov. 18, 2015
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top