Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Fleet
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 462 463 464 465
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I followed the link and note that it's IMP pairs, not KO. The 3NT contract reached at half the tables was not guaranteed to make.
10 minutes ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It would appear (see Don's post below) that the discussion is intended to relate to the sequence 1X-(1NT), not (1X)-1NT-(P)
13 minutes ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't always agree with everything you say, Eric, but on this occasion I think that you have it spot on.
15 minutes ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Leonard, it is very common here for the King to be a strong lead, asking for an unblock or count signal, with the Queen asking for an attitude signal.
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The answer to the question in the OP is simple: they should have bid.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's an underbid but partner might have done well to get us back into the auction.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My Q lead is not attempting to fool anyone: it shows KQ but not in a strong holding.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What stops partner having Kx?
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
5NT GSF (6 = A). I can't think of a way to solve the three small club partner without risking the opponents messing up the auction with diamond bids.
4 hours ago
Richard Fleet edited this comment 4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I played PC, both 2 and 2 were regarded as new suits at the two level, forcing to 2NT.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, it is a question of partnership definition. If your bid is within the partnership definition, and partner makes a penalty double, I cannot see why you would want to bid.

And if your bid was not within the partnership definition, you may well be looking for a new partner.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It doesn't necessarily right side it for diamonds (e.g. partner has K10x).
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The fact that partner opened 3rd in hand rather than 1st does not affect my decision in the slightest.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with this. 3 has the additional disadvantage that partner might shy away from 3NT for lack of a diamond holding.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Peter Burrows wrote an article for The Bridge World in which he proposed aggressor for an immediate defensive action and intruder for one after both opponents had bid. In the same article he proposed advancer, the only suggestion which TBW adopted.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, it's more likely that we get a minus score than we make a game if we bid on.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the Truscott defence to strong 1, a suit bid showed that suit and the one above. In my view, a 1 bid showing the reds is very much an overcall.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, if you pull this double it means that you made the wrong call on the previous round.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It occurs to me that the opponents might be in a lot of trouble on this deal: why should their fit be anywhere near as good as the one postulated by Itzik (ignoring the fact that this construction means that there are 14 hearts, 14 diamonds and 11 clubs in the pack).
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since we haven't been told anything about the methods, I think that we can employ our favourite ones.
17 hours ago
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 462 463 464 465
.

Bottom Home Top