Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Stefan Velja
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fair point, just a question unrelated to the main topic: what would be the advantages of playing x as lead directing instead of takeout? Same question if opps bid 1M-2c* (Drury). They might occasionally go to the third level (say, 1s-2c*-3s seems ok to be played preemptively), now it's just a matter of frequency of different hands (lead-directing vs t/o), and the benefits when they appear.
Dec. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Oh, that is inconvenient, yes.
Dec. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry Ian, perhaps we're having a misunderstanding. Where are exactly the jump shifts?
Dec. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A GF hand with diamonds and heart support is bid via the 4th suit, look at the third thumbnail at the bottom :)

When opps interfere, you behave as if partner were weak; if they're not, they'll bid something. Thus if you have a 4 bid over opps' 3, you're probably strong enough to do so over a partner's minimum raise (e.g. xxx Kxxx Jxx xxx), unless you have some other reason to bid. A double is for takeout, and 4 would probably be a natural suit, just so partner could know how high to compete. With a hand unsuitable for bidding, pass works just fine.

I'm pretty sure there would be some competitive sequences where they could preempt you high enough, but I haven't had issues during the year and a half long period while I had played this treatment. It is, still, the most sensitive part of it and I'm still looking for feedback. :)
Dec. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What do you mean precisely?
Dec. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't balance either, I don't see the big gain, but I'm not as fiercely against it
Nov. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass, or if I'm having doubts, stop drinking
Nov. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Note: Hearts split 1-1
Oct. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3d definitely shows four.
May 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From my perspective, partner should have at least QJ fifth or Q sixth 90% of the time, since he jumped straight to 5D (should have either length or a good suit), and it seems to me that developing a heart trick via dummy reversal should be fairly easy. Playing 6d on 4-3 hearts and 3-1 trumps should be good enough.
May 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On the actual deal, p had Jxx K QJxxx xxxx, so 6d makes with 2-2 diamonds and 4-3 hearts, but if the heart K was in any black suit, 6d is a great contract.

I agree completely with your analysis, especially if partner rates to try 4h with, say, Kx in hearts, or bid 3s with xx in hearts and no spade stopper. I would, on average, put him on at least xxx x Qxxxx Kxxx, in which case 6d is a great favourite.
May 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Gary, thank you very much for such nice comments!
I have filled out my profile a bit, seems better now? :)
Jan. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess “speculative” is a euphemism :)
Jan. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True, and if E shows out, there is a heart-diamond simple squeeze on W.
Edit: wasn't particularly focused, so it ended up being nonsense.
Jan. 9, 2017
Stefan Velja edited this comment Jan. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I really like the concept and am looking forward to testing it in practice.
There is one question, however, without a clear answer in sight. How do you bid with 0=4=5=4 hands, with 11-15 points? If you open 1d, what happens after partner rebids 1s? Repeating the diamonds seems reasonable, but there might be a more obvious solution.
Nov. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We haven't discussed psyches with the goal of misdirecting the opponents and letting the two of us know when a bid may be a psyche. We simply noticed that certain psyches are safer (cooler, if you like) than others and that we share a similar opinion on when we would psych. Stating that “p-p-1d-x-1s” is quite a good psyche with 1=3=6=3 distribution isn't really a spectacular thing. Many partners would probably agree on it, as my P and I most probably would.

Besides, we probably bluff once in 300 boards, or even rarer. The crucial point is that I may have insight on his thinking (and vice-versa) and thus may have an advantage over opponents when it comes to understanding a bid as a natural one or a psyche, and that leads to more interesting points in discussions like these.
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd pretty much behave in the same way you described. A potentially fishy situation is one where I alert “my partner might psych with a suitable hand” every third board, or if it is alerted only on one side of the screen. Would you alert “this is a situation where I might psych with a suitable hand”? If your opponents alerted potential payches, wouldn't that misguide you? What if these alerts happened unusually often?

Would you think it would be enough to write on your CC, under the psychics section, that you psych “rarely, but more commonly at favourable vulns”?

The thing is, we rarely psych, but in the situations we do, I would bet that we're not the only pair in the tournament who psyched in that situation.

Thanks to everyone sharing their opinion.
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for your comment.

The issue that arises is what do we do with assumptions which we've never discussed before. If partner bids something and I conclude “oh, it wouldn't be such a surprise if he psyched”, since I would presume that's a reasonable situation to psyche in, or that he would perhaps do so (based on the fact that I know my partner well), should I alert the opponents? I am almost certain that very few players would share their opinion on whether their partner has psyched at the table.
Sept. 23, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top