Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Stefan Olausson
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 30 31 32 33
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Announces to the other robots you mean?
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For comparison, I keep trying “The Disciplined Way” :)
Clocked in at 66.8%, # 215/7881.

Had one board at 46% – I was too “optimistic” in compet bidding.

Another at 44% – misplayed to miss an overtrick.

The rest above 50%.
Feb. 18
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Marty Harris

I probably need a simulation to see how “close” to zero it is with 18-19 hcp…

I agree they will often probably miss the lead, but that's a different argument :)
Feb. 18
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
yeah, “well done for discarding your loser”

:)
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
>“Should East-West have saved in 5♠ (down three)? No, for that would have cost them an additional 40 aggregate points when North-South bid the equally cold 5NT.”

Are you really sure they would have reached 5NT? :)

I'd rather say
“No, saving for 500 against a 5-level contract that might sometimes go down is bad business in the long run” :)
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@David
From your question, I figured you maybe played the 3 and your pard switched suit… :)
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
>“the risk that we're off the AK of diamonds is close to zero”

Is it?
Even if West held 22 hcp (rather than only 18 promised) we could still be missing a control:

KJ
AKJx
QJxx
AQJ

Take away A, still 18hcp, and we even go down in 5.
Feb. 17
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about playing UDCA…..
Feb. 17
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Mixed-up”, in the sense that:

- If A looks right, why do I do B? :)
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
>“ It looks like underleading the ace of diamonds is the right play. You choose to lead the ♥8.”

Yet another of these “mixed-up conclusions” that Kit loves to include :)

True, if declarer misguesses the diamonds too after the underlead, we can set it 3 down.
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True, Richard.

And my “decent” opening-hand, turned out to be 100% USELESS in this contract :)
Feb. 17
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(deleted)
Feb. 16
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even if 2 is limited (ca 10-11 I assume), opener may still have a strong 5+4, in which case 2 F1 is most convenient.
Feb. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. 2=Nat F1. 3=5-5 GF.

2. 2=Nat F1. 3=5-5 GF.

3. 2=Nat F1. 3=5-5 GF (I detest 2 non-forcing, though)

2. 2=Nat F1. 3=5-5 GF.
Feb. 16
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't get it….

If you have agreed 2-way NMF, 2 is defined as
“either sign-off in , or invitational to game” (isn't it?)
and should of course be alerted.
Feb. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
>“every other rebid is expected to have 3-4 diamonds”

I must say, that is an approach I never even heard of…

I prefer 2D is the “default rebid” with
any balanced 12-14, or
any minimum hand without 4+club support, or
4441(short ) any strength.

1D-2C-2M = 4-5 extras.
1D-2C-2NT = balanced 18+.
Feb. 16
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 1D-2C is game force, it follows that 1D-1NT can be up to 11 (12 lousy) hcp.

With 12 decent hcps, I bid 2C GF as “game try” – i.e. bid game, try make it :)
Feb. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(deleted)
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting points…

On the other hand:
- if you need to take a red suit finesse for 9 tricks, it might well be that East does have a side-entry.
- if pd is short in clubs, and has some help in spades, that might give you the ruffs you need to make game.

On a single board, anything can still be right, or be wrong, of course :)
Feb. 15
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a conscientious bridge-victim, yes, I carefully bid my spades and pay some 1100 against nothing, as usual…
Feb. 14
Stefan Olausson edited this comment Feb. 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 30 31 32 33
.

Bottom Home Top