Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sabrina Miles
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not likely. Very few would open 1NT with 2-2 in the majors. But then again, very few would bid 4 over a double of 2.
Oct. 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think p has basically lost it; the jump to 4 after he has already defined his hand (15-17) and after he has refused my transfer tells me that the partnership is not on solid ground. I pass when I am totally confused and there is no logical basis for p's bid. There is no logical basis for a 4 bid here. P could bid 4, he did not. P could bid 3, asking me for a stopper and forcing me to bid; he did not. P could bid 3 telling me of his length in and concurrently asking for a stop or whether I could carry him to game at 5, he did not.

I imagine partner's hand is 3-2-3-5, with 15 HCP. I further figure we will have a long post mortem and will most likely end the partnership.
Oct. 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not privy to the history as to why the Thanksgiving holiday was chosen as a date for starting the tourney. It is rather clear, however, that whatever savings that may be made due to the more modest hotel costs are significantly diminished by the higher airfares at that time. For many, Thanksgiving is a time for family get togethers. Perhaps its time to reexamine whether the another date….either before or after Thanksgiving might better suit the majority of players.

I note that hotel costs, if that is a major consideration, tend to be lower in early to mid December also.
Oct. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's tempting to convert the responsive double to a penalty double. P was a passed hand. However, the responsive double tells me that p has a scattering of values and length in the minors. (Opponents may have 8-10 ) I'm not going to risk opponents making their doubled part-score when I have another option – a non vulnerable option. Sure, if opponents want to compete on to game, then I will risk the double. But not here.
Oct. 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I admit that I am a bit stymied why p would query for key cards and then bail when I show 0-3. Surely p does not think that I have 0 key cards; he must know that I have 3. Perhaps p forgot that we play 1430 instead of 3014 – he thinks that I have 1 keycard to go with his 2. I don't know.

What I do know is that p is captain of this auction. He has set the contract and signed off at the 5 level. I have accurately described my hand to a reasonable p. Why am I now going to second guess his judgment and bid on?
Oct. 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Great work; well appreciated.
Oct. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Promises an honor. Without a honor, lead is top of nothing.
Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since p did not precept the transfer (by bidding 2NT), I know he does not have 3 including either the A or Q. We are high enough.
Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that 1NT here would have shown18-19 HCP. Had p bid 1NT, I would most likely raise to 3NT.

I have no clue what p means by 2NT. Here, I suppose the 2NT shows stopper, but weaker hand than 1NT. In any event, despite the scoring method, I am passing here because I don't know what p is trying to convey and I don't think I have sufficient support if p really is showing a weak hand. If p needs my support to go to game, there are forcing bids available. 2NT is not a forcing bid.
Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted for 2 because it is the bid I would make most often. I note, however that with a couple of partners I play sandwich NT in all seats. Thus, with those partners, I would have bid 1NT on this hand to immediately describe my holdings.
Sept. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Yuan and John, Interesting comments. I guess I prefer to show 6 piece before game force and I thought AKTxx was close enough to constitute 6 piece; much easier with 4 or Kxxx to bid 2. I thought purpose of 2 bid is to communicate game forcing immediately. Here, 1 is descriptive and gf bid is still available. P has not denied 3 or 4 piece with 1 opening. By passing 1 now, isn't the fit forever forfeited? Just where is the line drawn?

In any event, my real query here was whether jump to 3NT showed extra values or was limited based on preceding gf bid. Generally, I would think jump to 3NT showed extra values. However, in light of p's previous 2 bid and my gf bid, the 3NT did not, to me, now show extra values. I bid 4, and p passed it out,but slam is easily made here. P's hand is: Q3 AKT74 AJ QT82. Query, are all p's bid taken into account when deciding what the current bid means? If p has limited his hand (12-14 HCP) should one give normal meaning to subsequent bid that seems to deny the first limiting bid?
Sept. 27, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, Fantoni won the World Mixed Pair Championship with Donna Compton back in 2010. Her integrity is beyond dispute. Unless, of course, one does not consider a mixed pair event a truly world class event.
Sept. 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your p's hand at this point is unlimited. The only thing you know is that he has 5 and 6+ HCP. Why not describe your hand and see what happens? 1NT without a stopper is IMO better than misleading p about fit that is not there. Yes, 2 is better partial, but why have you given up on game?
Sept. 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I sure want to know what my p is thinking. I hope I can bid that pass in tempo!
Sept. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
good point. I guess I should specify that it is relatively new partnership and fast arrival has not been discussed.
Sept. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I find it interesting that your query is directly solely to “major” players. Do you think major players cheat for different reasons than average/ordinary players? People cheat to get an unfair advantage over the field – or is that the definition of cheating?

I would speculate that a lack of skill, ability, experience and/or low self-esteem has convinced the potential cheater that he will not win on his own merit and thus must device a method that gives him a chance to win. (Which, as an aside, is why I find it so hard to fathom any rationale for the behavior of the suspected cheats on the Monaco team). In any event, as a competitive person, I think the ego drives the need to win; the money, fame/glory are merely ancillary benefits.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ steve, not really tough inasmuch as E indicated that he had 0-7 HCP, if he had held the J he would have had 8. It's a typo in the printing, but not too difficult to figure out who held what.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paranoia has no nationality.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Justice Potter said “I know it when I see it.” This isn't it by a long shot. Although, I too, would be interested in hearing folks clearly defined guidelines for preempting first seat red vs white.
Sept. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whoa! Rather a straight-shooting, but nonetheless controversial post, given the BW more heavily leaning expert audience. I must admit that I missed the part of the fines levied being supplemented by central funds. If the experts did not like paying extra for screens that were used exclusively in the (semi-)finals of their own events, you can bet they will not like paying extra for investigators to police the upper echelon events to ensure a clean game at that level. Yet another reason that I do not like this proposal. Thanks for highlighting this fact.
Sept. 21, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top