Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Shawn Drenning
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At the table I bid 3 with the same hope as Richard. The auction continued X - 4 - P - P and now for better or worse I passed. So with no X, my plan was to pass if partner bid 4.

Over 4m, I was fairly confident that partner would take 4 as an offer to play, but I do not think it would necessarily show any slam interest.
June 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that by the time the auction got this high it was too late, but systemically there was not much choice. What is your preferred system after 1-2m-2-? (and similarly 1-2m-2 if you play something there too)?
June 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, that would work better on this hand, but certainly there are other hands where these methods work better?

In any event, was curious if anyone had good methods here. At the table, I felt we could easily have a slam if partner had extras, so 4 felt wimpy. The alternative seemed to be to bid 3; after that if partner bids 3NT I can correct to 4 (hopefully showing a mild heart slam try), but over anything else I'm either not any better off (if partner bids 4) or do not really know what's going on (if partner bids 4m).
June 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Responder will not be passing *too* often here, so you will probably get a chance to finish bidding your hand.
June 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More seriously, what's wrong with just accepting that being able to bid in tempo and not give your partner UI is part of the game and if you are not able to do that you may occasionally get worse scores than (the more skillful) pairs who are able to? It seems many people are aggrieved when they lose a UI ruling (or read about a high-profile one), but many of us also feel aggrieved every time we feel a pair solves a problem we would not have through their poor tempo and we have a little or no recourse (and even attempting to get rectification may lead to accusations that we are “poor sports” or “will do anything to win”).

EDIT: I realize that the OP was possibly (probably) being facetious, but point stands
June 14
Shawn Drenning edited this comment June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As long as I get an average plus when we do not get to the second board because you had a nine minute slam auction on the first board of the round, works for me . . .
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hmm, I think I prefer 3 with the original hand you posted.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is an entire thread where this is being discussed: https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/outraged-by-the-usbf/
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In our methods, 3 would be a game force
June 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just a sanity check. Pass seemed normal to me, but it would have gotten a poor score here.

Partner had Jxx AKx Axxxxx K and 4D makes depending on how you play diamonds whereas 4S has little chance. The field was in 4S, perhaps N was more aggressive with AQ10xx 10x K AQxxx at other tables (or S did something other than 2S with Kxxx Qxxx Jx 10xx).
June 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, useful thoughts, along the lines of what I was thinking.

I think making an agonized double here is about the worst possible thing you could do :)
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One of either direct 2 or XX followed by 2 as forcing makes sense to me (at table, was a little unsure if would be on same page).

A few follow up questions, if you double here (and in analogous sequences) is partner expected to pull with a singleton? After XX - some suit bid, how often should partner pass with a singleton? In general, I find in these sequences I rarely manage to successfully penalize even when it is right.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would usually play that openers jumps if he is accepting the invite. That helps keep you out of the really shaky games.

Whatever values with 55 in the majors you consider a game force, there is some level a little below that which you can invite with and with that hand, I would bid 3 (if invitational).
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would think that going through NMF and then raising response is slammish. So
1 - 1 - 1NT -2 - 2 -3
1 - 1 - 1NT -2 - 2 -3
1 - 1 - 1NT -2 - 2 -3
are all natural and game forcing and somewhat slammish (maybe less so on the 3 rebid). Otherwise, how do you make a slam try?

I think bidding immediately at the 3 level should be non-forcing
1 - 1 - 1NT - 3 is a drop
1 - 1 - 1NT - 3 is invitational
1 - 1 - 1NT - 3 *feels* invitational to me, but have not discussed with all partners.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I might do it, but overcalling with KJxxx xx xxx K10x vulnerable seems close to me, especially over 1.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A good hand for light overcalls I guess.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“allowing any player to abdicate from a winning team is fair to anyone:

What is your definition of ”fair“? The conditions of contest were well debated, published and well known (or should have been) by everyone. Even I was mildly aware of these changes from casual reading of bridgewinners

”It's like auctioning off a WC berth"

Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are getting at, but it seems unlikely that in the event that other Michael R.qualifies in the seniors the right to replace him on the mixed team will go to the highest bidder?
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just was curious if either 1 or 2 was the “obvious” choice, but seems to be a somewhat split panel.

At the table I bid 1 because it was a major, but after doing so I regretted not bidding 2. The auction continued 1 - P - P - 2 and now I felt stuck and passed whereas over 2 - P - P - 2 I could have bid 2. Fortunately, partner saved me by bidding 2 (RHO competed to 3 and for better or worse, but mostly worse I chose to defend rather than bidding a making 3)
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the sub-optimal part was that since it was single elimination, we did not necessarily send our two best teams. My outside view (I played in flight A) is that the team that won was the strongest team and that the team is 2nd was not clearly better than some of teams the winning team beat. I am not sure how to fix this though (the event could be made double elimination, but that would add an extra session).

The seeding was determined by a Swiss and everyone knew the conditions, so I do think the event was “fair”.
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was a pickup partnership, so while I had some ideas of what partner thought 2 meant, I deliberately did not speculate because I'm interested in what people think about this sequence (and it seems like there are a fair number of reasonable options now).
May 30
.

Bottom Home Top