Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sathya Bettadapura
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 53 54 55 56
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What if it does increase the size of the Platinum Pairs field a bit ? More people get a chance to play in a tough event for a day without jeopardizing their chances of playing in an event that they can fare better. World Championship schedule accommodates it by allowing drop-ins from MP Pairs to IMP Pairs. All I am suggesting is to extend the same concept to NABCs, an idea that's hardly revolutionary or original.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One change I'd like to see is the starting day of IMP Pairs in the Spring Nationals. Platinum Pairs and IMP Pairs start the same day. If you don't get to the second day of Platinum Pairs, you have to wait two more days before you have something meaningful to do. It'd be nice if IMP pairs started the day after Platinum Pairs started, to let people who failed to make it to second day of Platinum Pairs have a chance to play in IMP pairs. This will not increase the number of pairs entering Platinum Pairs substantially as Platinum Pairs requires pre-qualification.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Andrea,

Terribly sorry for your loss. He was my teammate when we won the GNT A in District 21 way back in 2001, the first year that GNT A came into existence. He was a great teammate and a lot of fun to be around. He'll be missed.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael,

If you bid 3 it might look like you're asking for a stopper when you might be the one holding the only stopper in your combined hands. If partner had xx in and values elsewhere, he is end-played in the bidding and you can no longer right-side 3nt when that's where you belong.
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Given two strangers who agree to “4-card Majors, Stayman and Blackwood” it's not surprising that they misbid the daylights out of this hand. They almost stumbled upon a decent slam until North decided to bid one more for the road, confirming that the bidding sequence leading up to it was purely incidental.

But this is a difficult hand for even established partnerships. I'd be curious to know how the bidding at those tables where West bid 2. My guess is that 6nt is the par contract, assuming the K is with West. Did anyone get there ?
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 may be an overbid, but I don't like the idea of bidding 3nt which could be on any random 4333 or 4432 12-14 HCP hand. If the choice is between bidding 3nt and 4 I'd rather bid 4.
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If there's room for all those cards in partner's hand what cards do opponents have for their bids ? And besides most people who play fit-showing jumps define the fit bid to be below game in the overcalled suit, so he can evaluate the fit. Unless of course you always pick up a seven-bagger side suit with 4-card trump support. Additionally the side suit is usually a brokebn suit like KJxxx(x) so partner can evaluate his Qx(x). You rarely wnat to introduce a suit headed by the Ace as Qx(x) in partner's hand doesn't add value. But if you have a firm believer in fit-showing jumps none of this theory matters for you.
Sept. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When partner overcalls if 3 is a fit-jump it forces us to game regardless of partner's holding. That doesn't make Bridge sense.
Sept. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry,

The first example of jump in other Major doesn't make Bridge sense Chances are your RHO a 4-bagger in the Major quite often, so most people attach conventional meaning to this bid rather than a natural one. In most partnerships I play this as a mixed raise of the opener's Major.

In your second example for fit jump to make sense the fit bid has be below game which means the suit has to be below the overcalled suit. I'm assuming that the idea of a fit jump is to stay below game if there's no double fit, so an auction like (1m)-1-(2om)-3 as fit showing doesn't make sense for me as it forces you to game when you may not have anything more than a 9-card fit in one major.

Even when (1m)-1-(2om)-3 can be fit showing, 3 as a preempt can be quite effective in jamming the auction for opponents. First they have to judge whether they have game values or not. When they do have game values they have to decide whether to penalize you or bid their own. And they have to figure out the strain. They can't give up on 3nt in which case they have to determine whether they have adequate stoppers in both Majors. If you think a 3 preempt helps opponents in their game or slam auction I'd like to see some evidence, hopefully statistical evidence. Anyone can come up with few hands where your favorite treatment works, but it has to make sense on a larger sample.
Sept. 3
Sathya Bettadapura edited this comment Sept. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Exactly. There was an article a while ago by John Swanson the exact title which I don't recall now, something like “Fit jumps give me the fits” or something catchy. He suggests that you employ fit jumps when you have a broken suit like KJxxx not Axxxx because Qxx is not as useful opposite the latter holding. So the frequency of holding a hand that's well-suited for a fit jump is far fewer than just a preempt. When you have a fit, there are other ways of showing it, like a cue-bid or a jump cue-bid but when you don't have a fit there's only one way, i.e, just simply bid the suit at some level. I have no idea why so many people think that fit-showing jumps are modern and/or sophisticated.
Sept. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3. I just offered what happened at one table to illustrate what can happen if you don't bid high enough to consume bidding space. Not sure you understand what ‘resulting’ means.
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hardly. I explained the reasoning behind my choice unlike you who just stated an opinion as though it were a universally acknowledged fact.
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 already shows INV+ values, we have found a fit. Not sure if opponents have. Since we already have a 9+ card fit in it can be argued that bidding 4 or perhaps even 4 takes up bidding room when opponents haven't yet discovered their best strain yet. BTW at one table they bid a fit-showing 3, opener bid 4, partner bid 4, double by the 2 opener, 4 by the 1 opener and they confidently bid 6. Do you want to give opponents this much bidding room ? (Granted that 4 gives them room for 4 bid too, which is why 4 is better as takes that bid away)
Sept. 1
Sathya Bettadapura edited this comment Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not really, the bidding could at the five level or higher before it gets back to you again.
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You do have a 9-card fit in presumably.
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not conventional. My guess is he expects to beat 5 !
Aug. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Grue - Moss open light whenever the vulnerability is favorable. It looked like all 1-level except 1 were pre-emptive in nature as often as not. That obviously created a lot of action of the good kind and the bad kind and had the opponents guessing quite a bit throughout the tournament. The price you pay for this kind of action is accuracy in constructive bidding, especially at the slam level.
Aug. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Chris,

You took exception to Kit saying “the problem has been the players are booking room they don't (or might not) plan on using.”

We heard (from Jonathan Steinberg ?) that about 900 rooms were cancelled a week before the start of Toronto Nationals. If cancellation of 900 rooms doesn't indicate that there is a problem in this regard, I don't what else will convince you.
Aug. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
May be he signed off because he had nothing more to say after his super-accept ? But how does opener know about the K ? That's a crucial card for considering a grand in either or .
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think we had a similar discussion about the efficacy of monetary fines to discourage cell phone violations, the idea being that a monetary fine doesn't mean much to the wealthier among the players. If we extend the same logic here though, my guess is that people who can afford the big fines, typically sponsors and their teams are regular attendees. So they don't hog rooms early and cancel at the last minute. That's likely to be done by people who're unsure they'll attend and are trying to exploit the system to the disadvantage of other legitimate tournament-goers. I think this new policy has a good chance of working.
Aug. 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 53 54 55 56
.

Bottom Home Top