Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Shawn Drenning
1 2 3 4 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 35 36 37 38
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ahh, yeah sorry, should have spread out when I posted these problems!
May 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree transferring and bidding a minor is natural, but what comes next is undiscussed in a lot of my partnerships. How does opener set trump? What does bidding 4nt or a new suit mean?

My answers would be opener can bid either of responder’s suits with a fit and 4nt would be natural. I guess bidding a new suit would show slam interest in second suit?
April 29, 2018
Shawn Drenning edited this comment April 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If your agreement is a third seat opener can be light, then I do not think it is “fielding a psyche” to not make as many close penalty doubles etc. after partner opens in third seat.

Assuming everything is disclosed and you are not playing any illegal psychic controls, I do not get your point regarding the recorder. Are you suggesting some pairs have some nefarious way of determining whether a third seat opener is light or not?

I do not know what the regulations are, but assuming it is not legal to systemically open 3 counts, sure file a recorder if a pair does this against you. I feel this was discussed in another thread (the one about Lall/Bathurst 3rd seat non-vul openers), but even if you psyched every time it was passed to you not vulnerable in third seat when you held a three count wouldn't this still be a very low percent of your third seat openers (so partner is not really going to play you for a 3 count)?
April 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Bernard I had 63 AK10x Q9x Qxxx and when I got in with Q of clubs I knew declarer had AK spades and AJ of clubs, so if he had the Q of hearts that would mean he made a strange play in diamonds. Even though I had worked all this out I still played a diamond, why I’m not sure?

@Richard yes, definitely some good takeaways from this hand for us.
April 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was W on this hand. From my perspective, based on declarer’s play from dummy at trick one and the fact that he considered ducking partner’s jack it was clear to me that our best defense was to continue spades even though I had led from 63. I decided to cash the heart king first to clarify the position for partner, intending to play a spade regardless of partner’s play. Partner also believed the best defense was to continue spades but was not sure I knew, so he decided to discourage in hearts.

The problem arose later when I was in with a club and had to decide where partner had an entry and I was unsure what meaning his discouraging heart from earlier in the hand had. On this hand maybe a better defense would have been to play an immediate spade and then later play the heart king to get an unambiguous signal (a further issue was that partner played in good, but not perfect tempo to the heart).

I get that attitude signals are not used to deny or show honors, but it seems at a certain point if it is “obvious” enough that a heart continuation is not right that signalling to deny or show an entry is more useful. That said I tend to dislike vaguely defined signalling agreements where you give a different signal depending on how “obvious” something is because I never seem to be on the same page as partner.
April 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because I don’t remember the spot played, but I had to pick something?
April 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4th best from length at trick 1. With a bad suit can exercise judgement to lead top of three or second best from four
April 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Bernard that I do not quite understand why so many people want partner to play another heart when we still have the K and it does not look like there is an entry to dummy to finesse it. If partner has the K it probably does not matter what major he plays next, but if declarer has the K don't we want partner to continue spades and later our Q will be an entry?
April 21, 2018
Shawn Drenning edited this comment April 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, if you had a choice a high club would show a dislike of spades.
April 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
GIB may have some glaring weaknesses, but so do most club bridge players and overall I think GIB does a lot of things very well (certainly I would rather partner with GIB than a random club player).
April 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think with a four count and three card support I would normally respond 1nt, but maybe that is not “normal.” I also don't think it is having my cake and eating it too to suggest that opponents with half the deck and shortness in my suit will balance a lot of the time.
April 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, partner may be surprised that your hand may have FIVE defensive tricks against 4 spades. That said, I suppose this is more an argument for playing a four heart opener as wide-ranging. I'm not really convinced that the number of times you avoid either languishing in 1 or being preempted outnumber the number of times you miss a slam or cause partner to misjudge the hand.

If I played NAMYATS, I think i'd prefer that it showed a less ratty trump suit (i.e. that the number of playing tricks does not depend much upon partner's level of support)
April 15, 2018
Shawn Drenning edited this comment April 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner has a 4333 Yarborough probably opponents with half the deck and only three hearts will balance? With a bit more, I think partner will stretch to bid with three hearts.
April 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Will your partner get you to seven with Axx Kxx xxxx Qxx if you open 4?
April 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes a pair doing that or any other number of things would probably get away with it at lower levels (or for that matter higher levels). In the end though, bridge is a game we play for fun so why not just try to play the game the right way and not worry so much about what other people are doing? I would be a little surprised if there are a lot of pairs blatantly cheating the way you suggest at lower levels anyway.
April 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well if his partner had a 10-count we wouldn't be talking about this hand?
April 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I may be slightly below the level of the players you describe, but I all the time make a mistake at the table and do not bother making a Bridgewinners poll because I know what the result will be (that there is a clear answer I did not find it at the table). I have also made polls and gotten unanimous responses where the actual action taken was different at both tables (and in some cases one I did not even consider).

I'm all for filing memos (and think you should if you feel uncomfortable about the hand), but I'm really hesitant to draw any conclusions from one hand (like this was a long match, did they not make any questionable decisions that worked out poorly for them?) and if you only looked at the hands where we make a bad decision that works out almost all of us would look suspicious.
April 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Curious what a simulation would show if you replaced the hand with a non-descript balanced 12 count?

Partner is not forced to force game with a balanced 12 count though and there are plenty of hands where opening this hand probably gains (OP's hand, probably a lot of the time when partner is on opening lead etc.)
April 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, at the table it was not obvious to me if that meant bidding 3 or 4
April 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's ugly, but if there are 14 real teams, couldn't you use the Bridgewinners software with 50 “bye” teams?
April 3, 2018
1 2 3 4 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 35 36 37 38
.

Bottom Home Top