Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Rosalind Hengeveld
1 2 3 4 ... 31 32 33 34
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I tend to agree. I wonder if everyone will agree.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass is a gamble that may well pay off, but this hand is just too strong and beating 1 down six or seven (to beat 3NT our way) is unlikely.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1NT is usually played as less strong than this.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My partner and I adopted ‘Lavinthal in the trump suit’ lately (too late, some would say). We like it, but it tends to lead to a two-second huddle before playing to the first trump trick with two or more small trumps. And all too often a remark: “Yikes, no trumps, opponent?”

My position would be that to a ‘qualitative’ signal – I like the term – a two-minute huddle would be unethical or at least ‘not done’, but a two-second huddle should be no problem (and not be taken as one).
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It reminds me a bit of the world top pair – names withheld – that plays ‘Reverse Lavinthal’, which (as they admit) has no merit whatsoever over vanilla Lavinthal, but just serves to confuse opponents.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael is right: these doubles – whatever their merit – are not Lightner.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know of two other solutions for a natural 1NT-overcall type hand when playing Raptor:

* Sjoert Brink & Bas Drijver's solution: a 1NT response to a take-out double is positive, showing about 8+ HCP. (I have no experience with this solution and I do not know anything more about it.)

* The reverse solution: a 1NT response to a take-out double is an artificial negative, showing 0–6 HCP and no four-card suit biddable at the one level. This 1NT neither shows nor denies a balanced hand or a stopper. Two of a suit without a jump is positive (but not forcing) with about 7–10 HCP. Over the latter, doubler will bid 2NT with about 15+ balanced. Over the 1NT negative, doubler will pass with up to a balanced 18 HCP; two of a suit shows five+ and does not promise extra values. (I play this second solution.)

Both methods have as a (claimed) side advantage that 1NT will often be played from advancer's hand, so that opener will be on lead.

As is to be expected, no ‘solution’ offers complete compensation for the ‘loss’ of a natural 1NT overcall, but methods like these considerably cut back any disadvantages of playing Raptor.

It has been observed that people who ever give Raptor a try are invariably unwilling to give it up.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For non-American players, ‘You play BWS’ may well be as arcane as ‘You play Moldavian Club’.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Over 2, 2 looks obvious.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another perfect Raptor 1NT overcall: five+ diamonds and a four-card major. (I did not abstain but passed.)
July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, a bid like 4 sets the trump suit (though I would prefer the J for the bid, but that is not the point).
July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why does 2NT show three spades (as stated), not simply less than four spades?
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, by ‘set methods’ I mean methods set for a specific bidding poll, not for any and all bidding polls on a certain medium. I was hoping that examples like ‘You play Moldavian Club’ would make that clear. I am inclined to believe that Ian, too, did understand it in that sense.
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With a minimum 5-higher-6-lower I tend to open the higher five-card suit. With this hand, however, I am content to treat the weak five-card suit as if it were four cards.
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3: this shows a strong balanced hand that is game-forcing opposite a ‘genuine’ response. Advantages over a stultifying 4 are more room for slam tries below game and 3 as a sign-off with a subminimum response. 4 by responder is a transfer to 4. (After 1-1-3, 3 is a transfer to 3.) 3 by responder is a suggestion to play 3NT despite the major suit fit, typically with a 4333. 3NT by responder is a slam try.

I am not aware of a name for this convention. Any ideas?
July 22
Rosalind Hengeveld edited this comment July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Moldavian Club? :)
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1NT: ‘Raptor’, five+ clubs and a four-card major. Glad to be playing this, like so often. (See also my recent general poll ‘Set Methods or Own Methods’.)
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have opened 1 irrespective of agreements (except for Strong Club). I lead 6 to show partner my suit is bad.
July 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are two ways to state a bidding poll: (1) include methods, clearly and comprehensively; (2) allow participants to use – and to feel free to explain – their own methods. I prefer the latter.
July 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 = slam try in hearts. Note that the poster did not mention Texas.
July 20
1 2 3 4 ... 31 32 33 34
.

Bottom Home Top