Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Fleet
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 885 886 887 888
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In “Traditional Acol”, the 1NT rebid was natural and not particularly well-defined (a 1NT opening was variable depending upon vulnerability).

The influence of the Baron players led more and more Acolytes to define a 1NT opening as 12-14 and a 1NT rebid as 15-16. This was a standard approach when I started playing seriously in the early 1970s.

The 15-17 range for a 1NT rebid is a more recent development.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, he should have bid 1.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're not that slow - not in the same class as (deleted for fear of legal action).
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, double should be a more distributional hand.
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4, getting the hand across in one bid, albeit at the risk of partner being 3=3=2=5.
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree but partner heard you bid 3.
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We have hardly underbid this hand so far (including taking the bidding above the game level) and we only have one ace. Time to draw in: if 5 ends the auction, slam will not be great.
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was intending to rebid 4 over 3NT.
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would appeal a ruling against me if I thought that the decision was flawed in some way. It would depend upon what the Director said.
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why should rebidding 2 lead to a 3NT contract?
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What would be “absolutely obvious at IMPs”?

In my view, this wouldn't be a problem if South had reopened with 1NT rather than Double.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, the second hand is a normal 2 response to 1. I can't see any objection to the bid (obviously, it is unsound to regard this as FG).
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assess the Blame or Allocate the Blame.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think that there is any easy solution to this one.

In part, it depends upon what you expect for partner's double and that determines what additional values South has over and above his or her 4 bid. There is the additional factor that South has an excellent diamond holding and only a moderate club holding.

I think it's a great problem and look forward to hearing how badly my choice (5) has worked out.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have never in my life deliberately played an IMP non-vulnerable undoubled game for one down when there was a line to make the contract.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had in mind that cards have varying amounts of ink on them and so the weight might differ fractionally.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree and that is why I often ask for clarification of the bidding.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with bidding 5 but both North and South should have doubled 6.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A weak raise to 3 sums it up nicely. I regard Pass as unthinkable.
Dec. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As well as being greedy, double might tip off the diamond position.
Dec. 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 885 886 887 888
.

Bottom Home Top