Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Scott Needham
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1N-2D/2H-5C = EKCB. If I don't tell partner about the short, s/he's going to hold Qxx Qx Qxx AKQx; if I do, maybe s/he'll hold Qxx AQx AQ Jxxxx. Not sure how else to keep 7 in view.

EDIT: Thinking about this: I wonder if it would be useful to have the agreement after this kind of auction that O skips 5M with a good hand, and bids 5M with the “very bad hand, partner.” 'Cause any hand with good Cs and xx in the M will disappoint as well.
Oct. 29, 2012
Scott Needham edited this comment Oct. 29, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3S: Edgar made me do it, and he made partner bid 2S with Axxxx and some xxx xxx xx.
Oct. 26, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner expects to make 4H opposite a WNT. If s/he holds 3 keys, I'm bidding 6 and if not, then s/he'll make 5. S/he always makes 5, doesn't s/he?
Oct. 26, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
what he said….
Sept. 30, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2C: Edgar made me do it, I'll apologize later.
Sept. 24, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
would this partner be likely call 2N with this one instead of 3D?
Sept. 23, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
oops. Shoulda known.
Sept. 23, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think most good intermediate bidders around here would surely recognize 4H as a slam try in a preemptive auction, but would be loath to cue a K; that alternative would be my teaching point. OTOH, I think most of them would figure that 4S is the most discouraging call and would bid 4S with a good S suit and the H K, recognizing it is wasted. And most of them would probably go RKCB with good S and a K or any shape feature, or decent S and both minor Ks. So depending on specific knowledge of this student I'd either pass or, figuring 5-level safety, take another chance with 5C – and circle the board.
Sept. 21, 2012
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 21, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've been told that, playing 3/5, one is s'posed to lead 3rd from 6 – comment?
Sept. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And better yet, playing WNTs, open this one 1N.

EDIT: Obviously aping Richard….

2nd EDIT: Seeing the “Flannery on” addition to the problem, I'm even happier to open. Pass 1NT, raise 1S or 2D. I have an agreement with my partners that, when I hold this hand, they don't hold C, but if this partner violates, I'll take my poison with either 2H or 2N, whichever is the undistinguished min bid.
Sept. 20, 2012
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 21, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Student” covers a lot of ground; the problem is unbounded.
Sept. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
wish 4D was minorwood, hope 4N = 1430….
Sept. 17, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I asked about Sandwich b/c if They do play it, I'd expect the 2N call to be at least 6-5 – and, without a good reason, I'm staying out of that, at least until They pick a suit. But Adams' choices seem reasonable in principle.

Agree with Lynn: Folks have taken to looking at cards to discover Sandwich and, when it is there, They will take liberties if the opportunity presents.
Sept. 12, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
x & y are any suits allowed by the auctions? and y<x in 3) & 4)?

these 1) & 2) 2N pairs play Sandwich?
Sept. 11, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One deal proves nothing; however, from a team game last week:


AQJx
VOID
Kxxx
QT9xx

K8x………….x
AKQxx………..JTxxx
Qxx………….Jxxx
Jx…………..Axx

T9xxx
xxx
Ax
Kxx

S deals:

P-1H-X-4H
4S-5H-5S AP +650

At the other table, W opened 1N and played in 4H, -1.



Sept. 7, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
unless, of course, it's not. Someone might be able to make a frequency argument that would be persuasive….
Sept. 3, 2012
Scott Needham edited this comment Sept. 3, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you cue 1st round control only or 2nd?
Sept. 3, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yep. Both times R v W, both times poor score.
Sept. 3, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like through 3N. Had a couple of bad results after 1M-(3N)-?.
Sept. 2, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, I do understand – that's the objective.

Yes, I am relatively inexperienced, having taken 30 years off of bridge for various reasons (lots of reading and study and some random play in the interim), and only playing tournaments for the last 4 1/2 years or so. I am finding as I play up – my favorite events right now are Bracket 2 or 3 KOs at large regionals – that many competitors in those events use the alert procedure and the laws as part of their arsenal (oughtta be a checkbox on the card “aggressively use questionable interpretations of the Laws to interfere with opps' play”), so for some time now I've been thinking I must make study of the Laws a part of my game. You undoubtedly see why ;-)

I'm lucky enough to have detailed agreements with most partners, so “imagine screens” works quite well for me (and is likely to be the only criterion I can apply ATT to any good effect.) Cases 1 & 2 are pretty much no-brainers to me, b/c I have agreements I prefer in those situations, and I understand the problems that arise if agreements are not in place; the question whether I would allow a call is not one I need to consider, so I don't need to pursue those minutiae. I just need to be able to do my best when and if a situation arises. Unfortunately, this goal is complicated by the poor rulings we see from directors, and the varying opinions they hold, on many issues.

Onward and upward. Wishing for a comprehensive ethics handbook; resigned to having to peruse the appeals case books. Maybe you'd like to do periodic articles for BW, in the form of 5-10 question quizzes? That kind of exposure to relevant issues would be a considerable boon to a high percentage of BW readers….
Aug. 25, 2012
.

Bottom Home Top