Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Rosalind Hengeveld
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 40 41 42 43
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1SA, Raptor: perfect at this vulnerability with 6-4. Bidding ‘problems’ suitable for Raptor are abundant on this forum, challenged as such only by ‘Bridge World Death Hands’. (No methods were stated.)
6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree the method is unplayable: something has to be a general game force, neither guaranteeing nor denying anything. 2 – called ‘third suit’– would appear to qualify.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends on what 2NT means. If 20–21, I pass, as this is a bad 5, opener is about twice as likely to have 20 rather than 21, and it is matchpoints.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It makes some logical sense for Lebensohl not to apply. However, it makes more practical sense to have your system be as consistent as possible and not alter it unnecessarily after partner has passed.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I get the impression that being no more than a ‘competent’ player but an excellent bidder gets you pretty far at about any level.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Note that in the first situation, partner is unlikely to have led the ace as the opening lead. If they now lead the ace, they have probably figured that you are likely to have values in the suit or that it is the best remaining chance of setting the contract. This makes our signal less important and less equivocal.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play that the highest card that can have a meaning of ‘high’ is the ten. In other words, only number cards can have a meaning of simply ‘high’ of ‘low’; court cards (jack or higher) have special meanings.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2: I play this as a modern convention called ‘K2’ (named after the mountain and invented by Berend van den Bos & Joris van Lankveld). It shows a weak (5–10) hand with exactly five hearts and at least three spades, not 5332. This hand is ideal. Advantage over 2 as just both majors is that the long hearts are known. Advantage over bids showing hearts and a minor (such as ‘Muiderberg’/Dutch Twos) is that we can get out of hearts into another known suit and stay at the two level.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
CONCLUSION

After 254 votes and 125 comments a whopping 84% of voters believe that Garozzo was right or that he even underestimated the edge of bidding. Comments supporting this view range from ‘feeling’ – my intro left nothing wrong with that – via various arguments to hard data (Emily’s lunch break). My own view in the matter sides with the majority.

In addition to 38 abstentions and 15 believers in equal importance, ‘only’ twenty voters or ‘just’ 9% believe bridge is more play than bidding. I must add that this does include some highly respected players and contributors to this forum.

There are many ways to divide humanity into two categories. Bridge players can roughly be divided into ‘bidders’ and ‘players’: in the extreme form, the players see bidding as just a way to reach a playable and maybe interesting contract, while the bidders tend to view declarer play as a way to vindicate their bidding, defense to refute opponents’ bidding. I wonder to what extent one’s primary interest in the game affects the importance one assigns to bidding versus play.

Thanks everyone for your valuable contributions.
Nov. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would surely have opened this promising hand, in my system with 2, which includes a weak two in diamonds (we can find the three-card spade suit), else with 3 or 1.
Nov. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Swings in play can be equally random: think of two-way finesses with insufficient indications, or of a choice between two finesses with no redress after picking the wrong one.
Nov. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I too think Nigel’s formulation of the question is spot on. (I’ll save conclusions for later.)
Nov. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I declare 3NT when the other table played 1NT making two (@Debbie, far above), that is sure to create a swing, which is attributable to bidding. It is which way the swing goes that is attributable to play.
Nov. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I meant for the poll to pertain to ‘high level bridge’ and stated that in the introduction, but admittedly it does not stand out and may even be equivocal (not: high level of bidding).
Nov. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With abstaining, I presume.
Nov. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don’t think system variance versus judgment variance can be scientifically investigated, if only because the very purpose of system is to aid judgment. However, let us not underestimate ‘real work’.
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I meant for opening leads to count as play, though I agree they have a strong relation to bidding.

It surely appears that, of imps gained from play, a sizeable portion, maybe even a majority will stem from opening leads.
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The figures, 78% versus 22%, are so sharp that despite the relatively small number of 128 deals the outcome must be statistically significant.
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just love science over hunches and hogwash and I am impressed by your work.
Nov. 8
Rosalind Hengeveld edited this comment Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would think in most cases of overbidding, the resulting contract just cannot and will not be made, no matter how declarer plays.
Nov. 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 40 41 42 43
.

Bottom Home Top