Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Robert Leese
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not wild about bidding anything here without knowing more about opps 4441 agreement and the doubling agreements, but the X's would both be takeout-oriented in my partnerships, so I old my nose and bid the lowest place with which my partner may agree. Given the usual responses & F/U bids to MiniRoman, P is more likely to have a m than M. I agree with Richard that X of 2H (responsive-like) may very well have done our partnership the most good - I have H's & as much as P can expect, so why not tell him? It could backfire if opener had 4H's, but P should then be short there & know something's amiss.
Feb. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That also works fine in IMP's, and it can still be converted to 7NT in MP play.
May 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I bid 3S but I think it really comes down to whether it is easier to obtain forgiveness for bidding this from your partner afterwards or permission to be so aggressive ahead of time. If your partner is a strict by-the-booker, P is going to be a lot more harmonious.
May 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Given your agreements, which would also be mine with most partners, I see nothing wrong with 3D, which accurately describes your shape. Partner is going to bid again, you appear misfit in spite of your HCP, and 3N may be the best strain if P bids it. Pass whatever game he bids. I don't see any hurry to try to steer to any strain yourself.
May 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing standard NegX and 1S, one does indeed curse the bridge gods(demons?) with this hand. I hate to pass just because there is no good bid, but that was my vote here. The weak NT comment below is noteworthy. It may be whoever wins this auction gets the negative score.
May 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1N in a romp. 'bots at times are less than predictable - like partners!
May 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Matt, knowing you and your regular partner through my play in the same clubs, I do not believe you should have been elevated to the “A” strata for the reasons you state, even though I believe you both play significantly above your MP rating (the only rationale the director could have in your case, to my knowledge). While this might serve the purpose of making more “C” players eligible for MP's, it would discriminate against you and your partner in the rightful accumulation of yours, and thus not be fair to you. This seems to be your assessment of what happened. I would be happy to discuss it with you in person at your convenience since, knowing the directors as well, I can not understand why this occurred.
May 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for your post. Your 3rd paragraph above states a point I was bringing up in my reply to Steve above more directly than I did.
May 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Steve. Never knew what's in your last sentence, but it makes sense, since some clubs in D25 have players of considerable ability from foreign countries whose “MP's” are not recognized by the ACBL.
May 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jay, on the suggested SJS auction, with opener rebidding 3S, 4NT by responder should elicit a 5S (2 with) or 5N (even with a void) response from opener. With the given responder hand, I agree completely that bidding 7S OR 7N would not only be indicated but expected. If responder just bid 6N, as opener, I would have trouble accepting his decision to stop there and not bid 7S (he did,after all, initiate RKC after S's). If he wanted to correct to 7N, fine, as I don't know about his source of outside tricks, or understand, like you, why he didn't just bid it himself over 5N.
May 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That would work, with a bit of angst, playing strong jump shifts. Not as good a story, though.:)
May 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robin, as usual, your input is insightful, and probably the single best reason for 2S being the best, and most popular choice. It is wrong for defense, but today's style is to “take up” action rather than “go quietly” into the goodnight of letting opps play unchallenged 2M contracts.
May 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did think you were only discussing the breakpoints. I can think of no justification for what you describe, so, knowing the directors at the club, I can only conclude it was a mistake. Absent the director's input, I can't comment further.
May 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree completely. In the all-important postmortem, we all agreed opening 1S followed by a key-card auction (we use specific K ask) would have been a more disciplined, scientific approach. We also use Voidwood. Responder would have started started it, so the true value of opener's hand may have been a bit difficult for responder to appreciate, but using the same logic he did at the table, I think 7N could still be reached. Probably better bridge, but not as good a story.
Also, on the down side (responder having a bad hand, playing 2/1 and making every effort to respond (at leasst 1N) to a 1S opener, there is very little chance of missing a 4S game.
May 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Point well taken, and I certainly consider 2S reasonable, and looking at the upside, it may well be better. I remember what Eddie Kantar used to say, though, “Do not plan on P having specific cards - he will not have them.” Looking at the downside, give LHO(opener) KJx, KQxxx, x, Axxx and RHO the HA (not unreasonable) and there could be tough sledding. I think most, and I might at the table, bid 2S in this setting since we all like to compete, but it is not without a down side, particularly if P is less than disciplined or nearly broke, which he may be, since opener could be quite strong wrt HCP and X v V might look good v a W game. I'll leave specific odds to the statisticians and/or computer programmers, as comparing missing a V game to extra negative X'd frequency/reward/penalty doesn't seem easy to me.
I think it's a good question,even if 2S is the overwhelming favorite in BW's respondents.
Appreciate your input - thanks.
May 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2S may well be right, and 5-6 IMP's is likely at stake either way. It likely depends on you opponents and partner. The problem for P is that 2S is ambiguous and R v W is reason for some caution, especially v good defenders. Most will probably go for 2S, wanting to push rather than be pushed, but opener is unlimited, behind you, and his S holding is unknown, unless they play Flannery, not that popular nowadays.
May 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the reasons for adjusting the ranges for ABC are more benign than trying to favor some pairs to one degree or another. I am usually in the “B” category, but at times, depending on what club I'm in and who I'm playing with, will be classified “A” or, less often,“C.” I understand your frustration as we all like consistency, but I do not think it's a bad thing to allow directors some discretion to even out the field to try to provide for some competition at all levels. This is difficult in a club where players of all levels play everyone - stratification is not possible in a small venue, and even it is not always “fair” in the minds of players.
My solution is to more or less ignore the MP's awarded (Yes, I know this can be hard.) and to, more or less, try to assess how well I have played personally, based on my capability. Everyone in the ACBL recognizes the MP system is flawed in many ways and not a true measure of ability/talent. Unless a system is developed similar to chess where you are constantly reevaluated by performance rather than longevity this will continue to be a problem, and coming up with a system all think “fair” to do this in a game played with partners and team mates would be a job for the ages. We all know playing against a good C pair can be more challenging than playing against a pair of old “A” LM's set in their ways and past their prime.
In reality, the MP system, with it's colored points and all, is used more to encourage participation at all venues/levels than it is to objectively rate players.
May 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I must admit my X was a misclick. I would pass as the majority did. I had already bid my hand, though I may well have said 4D (preempt has high as possible as soon as possible).
May 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For partnership more than this hand, I lead the 9D. Sure, the 4thS might work out better, but if it doesn't, P won't be happy. I need a more compelling reason not to lead P's suit. KQ5x's is not good enuf - why shouldn't P's D's be AT LEAST as good?
Dec. 18, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top