Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ronald Kalf
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 43 44 45 46
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Abstain, not enough information about bidding methods.
3 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You don't know my partners hand. What would you expect from 2.
9 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are right of course, I was thinking in KSU-lines where 2 is 100% forcing. I change to abstain. I don't understand the bidding anymore.
10 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pard is 4054, almost half of my hcp are wasted. I pass!
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3N is perfect in that it tells my partner a lot about my hand.
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A natural 2N by doubler is even rarer, so how about cue with 4crd invitational and opener bids 2N with minimum and 3crd ?
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jay, the X of 1 is of course with 1354, sorry. Could also be 12 with 2344, same problem. With 10 and 4crd you are to strong for 2, but you don't like 3 on a possible 4-3-fit.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe the original post was to general.
(1)-X-(P)-2 with 10 points and 4crd . Pard passes with 10 hcp and 31(54). No problem.
(1)-X-(P)-3 with the same layout and we have to play 3 with a combined 20 in a Moysian.
You could of course play that a double of 1 guarantees 4crd and double less often, missing some good partscores or even games. Maybe there is a better solution!
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We would lead 8 from 832 also, but yes a misleading 3 from J32. It also is an attitude lead. We try to lead a relatively high spot card if we want pard to continue the suit only if we hit pards suit. Against NT you normally do not lead from 3 unless pard has bid the suit (then we kead 3rd/5th). It could be argued that you “bid” the suit with the double on 2N. In a comparable situation pard led “my suit” with 3 from J93. The suit was blocked for 1N-1 in stead of 1N-3, the difference between top and zero, because most other tables had 2 = or +1 in our direction.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I only voted to see if there are other bids then 2. You should have given E A in stead of the K.
I suppose 1N and Pass are jokes?
Sept. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't consider 3 as forcing. We have a fit, 5-3 or better! If I want to play 4 I bid it (as I do now). X would be responsive, if my high cards are good enough for 2 and my s are good enough for a penalty double, I would have responded some number of NT.
Sept. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In this case it's clear, but that is not always the case. My original question was “Do you ALWAYS lead lowest…”. Kit confirmed the “always” and I asked for his reasons.
Sept. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No rule of 11 then? What is the reason?
Sept. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you always lead lowest from 3 AND 4 against NT? Leading from 3 to an honour is not mentioned in your book, but I had expected 2nd highest. Not only to avoide ambiguity with respect to the rule of 11, but also to start unblocking.
Sept. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I want to be in game, 4 could be an alternative. This hand is much better then :Axxx, :Qxx, :xx, :AQxx where you would have bid the same.
Sept. 15
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With that hand my partner would have asked for shortness.
Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A is the imps lead
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I cannot imagine or read from Henry's post that 2 on 3316 is systemic. He was as surprised as any body about that. When I play KSU (where I could bid 2 on 3136 or in a pinch even 2326 with a good -stopper and xxx in ) I alert 2 as “could be just a stopper”.
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nothing wrong with the system, just time to go looking for the right partner. The problem started with the 2-bid on 3316. Even if “partner has been known to bid 2 with fewer then 4” it should show values in . It is part of a system called Kaplan-Sheinwold also known as EKAS in the Netherlands (before you were born).
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Frances, I agree with everything except that I'm not going to sell out below 5 and therefore can bid 3 in stead of 2.
Sept. 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 43 44 45 46
.

Bottom Home Top