Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Scott Needham
1 2 3 4 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 34 35 36 37
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I find fewer 8-10s pauses after a 2N opener or a natural jump to 2N or 3N, and I too feel that the failure to wait is much less objectionable in these auctions (normally the failure to wait drives me nuts). Anyone else?
Nov. 20, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What exactly are the 5 data categories? Contract is obvious, but none of Times Percent Cumulative scans for me.
Nov. 1, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you believe that a “standard” agreement in this position is that S should expect no values, only shape? As opposed to pass, then 3m or 4m depending upon how the auction goes? that W could not hold, say, Jxxx x xxxxx xxx?

Could N hold, say, xx x Axxxx Kxxxx? or xx x AKxxx xxxxx? or xx x Qxxxx Jxxxx? or xx x xxxxx xxxxx? any of them?
Sept. 30, 2014
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 30, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm used to playing a lot of direct 4N = natural in big auctions, and the limited GF hands go through 2D. After …2N-3/3-3 relay ask, cue of stiff = RKCB for X. And now I see that all of those “GF” should be “GF+” (= slammish). Sorry.

And I'm with some of the posters who'd like to see more of these auctions come up. ‘Course then we’d have to get it right….
Sept. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff, in the version I like, XYZ recovers the SJS at R's rebid: Jumps in Y are single-suited, jumps in X or Z or W are two-suited, pure, slammish.
Sept. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some alternatives (these include a 2-way alternative structure, where R's 2 does not force 2 – what do you do with weak 4M-6?):

R’s 2N relay -> 3♣:

R may pass with ♣, bid 3♦ to play (weak 4M-6, if playing 2-way), or
3♥ = GF, 4Y-5X with stiff, relay asks: 1st step = low, 2nd = high,
3♠ = GF, 4Y-5X-2-2, values in X and Y,
3N = GF, 4Y-5X-2-2, more in 2-2

When using 1C-1D/1M-1N with 4OM-6D and weak OR 2 -> 2 so 2 can be to play with weak):

R’s 2N relay -> 3♣:

R may pass with ♣, or
3♦ = GF, 5Y-4X with stiff, relay asks: 1st step = low, 2nd = high,
3♥ = GF, 4Y-5X with stiff, relay asks: 1st step = low, 2nd = high,
3♠ = GF, 4Y-5X-2-2,
3N = GF, 5Y-4X-2-2

Gumperz: 1m-1M/1N-2N/3♣-3X = 4M, 5+ m, stiff X
1m-1M/1N-2N/3♣-3N = 4M, 5+ m, 2-2
1m-1M/1N-2♦/2M or 2OM-3m = 5M, 4 m, GF
1m-1M/1N-2♦/2M or 2OM-3om = 5M, 4 om, GF

In all cases, 1X-1Y/1X-3X = GF+, 5-5 in X and Y
Sept. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
X-Y/Z-2C/2D-2N –> 3C: Now, pass to play, 3 level says something about cards in X and Y, GF+.
Sept. 25, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1-1/2-2/3-3N/4-4: Assuming 2 = 4thSuit, now 3N cannot be a COG offer with say KJx=KQTxx=xx=KJx? (Ignoring effects of 3N = Serious/Frivolous, and LTTC, but I assume would be agreed….)
Sept. 23, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ATT, the auction was P-(P)-1-(1)//X -(2)-3-(3)//4-(P)-4-(P)//6, down one when the K was offside as could have been predicted.

When I post-mortemed the deal, I thought West was compelled to follow through with a slam invite, in case Diamond is right and East's hand was any one of several suitable mins with minimal wastage in H or a good 3 rebid kind of hand. I also thought that East's 4 had to show one of those good hands for (4 shows gooooood for , the long hand takes the forces), and, with Cunningham, that, since West passed originally and could not have held all of the cards East wanted him to hold to make slam a good proposition with the overcall by South (missing the A, though….), maybe East should bid 5 instead of 4. Of course, then West would've held Axxx V KT9xx Kxxx instead.
Sept. 15, 2014
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 15, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No GB2NT; 4 is presumptively shortness; changed the E hand b/c this E would've opened 1N for sure with virtually any 5-3-3-2 15 count.
Sept. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Curious: How do you define 4N in this auction? Like a K-S DI? “really good for slam if you have one of the good hands you could have”?
Sept. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does KQx Ax Qx AT9xxx change anything but the creds of the 3 call? I'm changing the E hand, b/c I believe E had to have the 6th .
Sept. 13, 2014
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, this is a SNT p'ship.

Drat, left off an option, added now….
Sept. 13, 2014
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 13, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Yu: I learned in a game at a Caltech student house lounge – virtually 24-hour, and tough kibs. The bridge club there came much later, but I'm betting it's a good game.
Sept. 12, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The KC teller can't have bid up on a HCP-strong hand with no keys opposite someone's idea of a passable Rule of 20-22 distributional thing? It's been a long weekend, and right now I don't have the juice to sit and construct, but it seems to me this is a live possibility, however remote?
Sept. 8, 2014
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why the distinction?
Sept. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mr. Thompson has pretty much served up a primer for WNTers. How about another on defending minis? I vacillate on what I think is proper for the double, both direct and 4th.

Feel free to ignore if this looks too much like a thread hijack….
Sept. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is this 3 what most would expect? That said, would most call 3N after a “normal” 3?
Sept. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surely, people everywhere argue/discuss/advocate differently with some people as opposed to others? My close friends or long-time colleagues are likely to be on the receiving end of “that's the *(&^%** stupidist thing I ever heard” and will not even come close to taking offense; others may get something along the sarcasm gradient (maybe even a bit witty); some get much softer treatment until the boundaries are discovered. I'd call it “interpersonal awareness” or “plain courtesy” or “common sense,” applicable both in person and on internet fora, and consider anyone who doesn't take into account the possibility of boundaries to be either obtuse, egocentrically rude or simply looking for a confrontation. That's not just an American point of view, is it?

Aug. 30, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the 70s sometime Rosenkrantz published a TBW article analyzing average control points in balanced hands in varying HCP ranges. Can't find it right now, but my notes – really had to dig these out – reflect that that about 1/4 of 15 HCP balanced hands hold 4 or 6, about 1/20 hold 3 or 7, most hold 5. The example is below “average,” even if the QJ combo is counted at 1/2 as some Culbertson era authorities advocated. (“Control points” different from “quick tricks” or “honor tricks.”)

EDIT: Remembered Kleinman's standards: 15 HCP requires 3 1/2 honor tricks. This one just barely fails this metric, which would value the QJxx as 1/2 and Qx as “almost” 1/2.

Not claiming any of this means anything, just sayin'….
Aug. 23, 2014
Scott Needham edited this comment Aug. 23, 2014
1 2 3 4 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 34 35 36 37
.

Bottom Home Top