Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Stefan Olausson
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 36 37 38 39
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@rohit – seems like 3NT could often be the better game…?
June 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
>“My understanding is that if your hand is in range and has 4-4-4-1 shape with a small singleton club most BWers would open 1NT.”

Maybe you're right, dunno, but I never open 4441 with 1NT.
For the specific reasons, that:
- if you have singleton in a major, odds are that pd will transfer into your singleton suit and land you in a silly/inferior contract.
- if you have singleton in a minor, it means you are 44 in majors.
When opening 1NT with 44 in the majors, the risk is approx twice as high that you will be left in that contract when you have a superior 44 major fit, compared to when holding only one 4card major.

Even with 44 majors in a balanced hand, it is a clear defect in the std system, that we have to open it 1NT when in range. I prefer a system where we can always open such hands in 1 of a suit so we can locate the 44 major fit if we have one.

The only unbalanced hands I ever consider opening 1NT is with 43/34 in the majors, and 51/15 in the minors.
The risk of being transferred to your short minor is much lower than with short major.
May 23
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see how 2 can ever be non-forcing.
It's the “multi-force” you use to find out if pd has either spade-fit or heart-stopper for NT.

E.g
AKxxx xxx KQx Qx, or even
AKxxx xxx Kx Axx.

What on earth do you bid if 2 is non-forcing?
May 7
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that 1 4sf and 2 nat seems far better than the other way around, if I have to chose one of these.

Because the higher bid is then the more descriptive one, while the lower bid is the more frequent one.
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, 2 as slammish with -support makes more sense – if both players can remember such rare sequences :)
May 2
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see why we even need that jump to 2 at all.

You can bid 1-1-1-1 as GF with or without -suit.

Opener will raise to 2 if he has 4 cards in the suit, otherwise just respond the same as to 4SF.

With + and less than GF values, we respond 1-1.
May 2
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With no interference we play Bergen-variant:

1-2 = Nat GF, or 3-card support inv+.
1-2 = Exacly 3-card support, <=9p.
1-2NT = 4+support, GF.
1-3 = 4+support, 7-8p.
1-3 = 4+support, 9-10p.
1-3 = 4+support, <=6p.
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
> “1♥ - (1♠) - 3♥ should be a limit raise with the cue bid reserved for a game forcing raise.”

Also, what does he suggest 2NT, 3, 3 by responder shows after 1-(1)?
These are inter-dependent, so doesn't make much sense only to define 3….
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After
1-(1)-? and
1-(X)-?
we play 3 the same as with no interference,
so 3 is preemptive – 4+s, <=6p.
May 1
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Anyone can figure out what that Q at trick 1 was supposed to mean? (Now that we know it wasn't a singleton )
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wonder if it would work instead to play:
2 2 = Neg, or 4+h
2 2 = 4+s
2 2 = Bal 6+
?
May 1
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
re. the poll options:
What is the difference between 1st and 3rd option?
And difference between 2nd and 6th?

(or does 2nd option mean, duck then win with the Ace?)
May 1
Stefan Olausson edited this comment May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At a glance, after the 2-2M responses it seems you will very often get the weaker hand declaring… particularly adverse after the strong hand asks, and weak hand describes….
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
aah…. my Swenglish… :)

Over here, we say “green” (“grön”) for non-vuln.
April 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Still, much better score than 3NT.
April 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would certainly open the North hand, UNLESS my ONLY option was 1NT red-vs-green.
April 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Over 2, I like to PASS with a short major and 4 in the other one.

On the next round, X is for takeout, and bidding a minor is natural with 4 cards in the unbid major.
Would have worked better here, after (2)-(2)-(2).

But what also contributed to the problem is the system…
Playing 12-14-NT red-vs-green doesn't seem like an awesome idea to me.
It explains, though, why North didn't want to open.
Any other system, I always open 12+hcp, and we are in a much better position.
April 29
Stefan Olausson edited this comment April 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's one radical proposal.

And if you don't play a card within 15 secs,
the leftmost legal card is automatically played? :)
April 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Still — what was the purpose of 2NT followed by 3NT, rather than jumping to 3NT over 2?
April 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How are the players physically located during this game?

Are they sitting around a bridge-table with their tablets?
Or are they sitting in different locations, to avoid seeing pards “body language”, etc?

I also recall Fred Gitelman writing about a similar experiment, where you will not see opponents bids or cards in the last turn until it's your turn to bid/play.

Thus, if somebody “tanked” during the last turn, you will not know if it was your pd or one of the opps…
Is that feature part of this software, too?
April 28
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 36 37 38 39
.

Bottom Home Top