Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Steve Bloom
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 173 174 175 176
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Gave it to partner, and she raised one spade to two. East has an easy four spade bid.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So? It is close, after 4 4 whether South tries again. Blackwood is still ridiculous. South might try five clubs. North, with Kxxx AKxx xxxx x, bids five hearts, and there you are. North, with Kxxx Axxx Kxxx x, bids five diamonds, and South quits. North, with Kxxx AQxx xxxx x, might still try five hearts, or might quit. You might miss the slam when North had Kxxx Kxxx Axxx x.

In any event, the five level was safe. It is legal to go to the five level without using Blackwood (which commits, one way or the other).
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would guess the slam is even better, on the auction.

2-2 hearts = 40%. It appears that diamonds are 5-4. West, with a 4-1-5-3 pattern would double one heart, and might often with a 3-1-5-4 pattern. West, with a 2-1-5-5 hand would bid 2NT, and would overcall one spade with a 5-1-5-2 hand. So, West is a huge favorite to hold at least two hearts.

If hearts are 2-2, and QJxx of clubs are off-side, you are still OK if the spade king is onside.

If hearts are 2-2, clubs split, and they find the killing spade lead, when the king is off, you will make anyway, since the third club goes away.

However, the auction does increase the chance that East has a stiff heart. Let's say, for simplicity, that East is now twice as likely to hold short hearts, and let's also assume that West would bid differently with short hearts. A priori, East would hold short hearts 30% of the time. Double that to 60%, and that still means 2-2 hearts around 40% of the time.

I never worry much if we bid or miss a marginal slam. This one is marginal. So why sweat it?
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You rate to get a diamond lead, so, if trumps are 2-2 and clubs even close to reasonable, you have twelve tricks. If trumps are 3-1, you likely need a singleton club honor with the overcaller. Maybe a 40% slam on the auction.

Hardly worth an ATB. North made an aggressive slam try, influenced by the auction, and you got to a marginal slam. Eh.
Sept. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Win. Then think.”

Wrong. If you don't think about the hand, with the new information just made available, you might not get the defense right. As others have said, maybe it is right to unblock the ace holding AJx. Maybe it is right to signal partner about a side-suit with a suit preference card form an original AQJx. You can't simply win the jack, think, and then realize that playing the jack was a mistake.

You might object if the player thought for a long time before winning from an original Jx. But, with any other holding, there were options, and the player should think those through.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Enough, already. You are coming to a site like this, in which the best players in the world contribute. They take the time to respond to you, but you won't listen.

Michael Rosenberg has responded to you, and he just won the biggest event of the year. He takes the time to address you, but you don't want to listen. Enough.

Would you go on a tennis site and try to teach Federer how to hit a backhand? Give Nadal tips on serving? Are you going to tell Lebron James that his technique sucks? Enough!
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good point. Don't know how I play it as North, but, if I test clubs first, I know I would hook the diamond.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I only see twelve tricks. Win the spade lead, and examine options:

(1) Run diamonds, and hope for a club-heart squeeze, or 3-3 clubs to take 13. That squeeze is very unlikely, since West might well have led a heart holding five or holding the KQ. There is no pseudo-squeeze threat, since my club length will be known pretty quickly when I show up with one spade and only two diamonds.

(2) Test clubs, keeping open the option to play West for Jxxx in diamonds if East has length in clubs. That is my choice, and I would lose to the doubleton jack of diamonds.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“A low heart lead (!?) provided 3 heart tticks and the rest was zitzfleisch. ”

Three hearts, four clubs, one diamond. Where is trick nine?

No endplay on West. Whenever a diamond is established, East gets in to take three spades.

A low heart lead gives up two heart tricks, and a tempo. Now, if declarer works out to take three diamond tricks, the contract is home. But declarer cannot make the hand by setting up another heart winner.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
South should never lead a spade, but I can find layouts where a very aggressive spade lead is needed to set 2NT. Simply because 2NT made three does not mean that 3NT would fetch.

Heart is reasonable, as is a club, but the heart lead gives up a tempo. Now, if declarer guesses the diamonds, declarer can take four clubs, two hearts, three diamonds.

I still don't like declarer's chances, even on a heart lead. Seems like passing 2NT saved six IMPs. Not passing two clubs doubled cost eight.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Let's hope all agree.” I'll agree to three of those four words.

You are refusing to recognize that the defender does not have to play the same honor every time when holding both honors.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Jay: If you bid four diamonds, partner will play you for ten red suit cards. Assuming partner is short in spades, which seems obvious, partner will suspect your club void. When you suggest a save, but then double, partner will almost certainly play you for a club void.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Four clubs and four diamonds are natural bids, and encourage partner to push to the five-level, something you do not want. You seem to have three tricks on defense, and partner will often produce the fourth winner.

That said, bidding four diamonds could work out quite well - if partner saves, maybe you'll make. Otherwise, you double, and partner is likely to find the club lead.

I grade these as: P = 100. 4 (intending to double), 70. 4 (unless specifically agreed as lead-directing) 0.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you aggravated when partner passes, in first seat, and later overcalls hearts? If the hand did not qualify for a bid the first time, that does not mean it is never correct to bid.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Strongly disagree. You make a probability judgment when you bid a game. One factor is the likelihood that your opponents will find the winning defense. When your opponents are lousy, you bid more aggressively - in teams, in IMP pairs, in Matchpoints. Doesn't matter.

So, to take your MP's example: Bidding the game, when the overtrick would score well, is a gamble. You might gain 2 or 3 points, and risk 5 or 6. Is it worth the gamble? Depends on how often you expect to make this game. Against some pairs, you might judge that you would make 99 times out of 100. So bid that game, against that pair.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Forget this hand. Suppose you pick up a hand and judge that it is worth trying for game. Do you invite? Bash?

There are clearly advantages to inviting: Even if you judge that game will often be reasonable, that game will likely not be so hot facing the subset of hands where partner would turn down your invite. So, inviting gains in accuracy.

There are clearly disadvantages to inviting: Whatever sequence you choose, you are giving away information about your hand, and about partner's hand - information that may help their opening lead and subsequent defense.

That simple question - bash or invite, always depends on weighing these gains against these losses. Will you gain more in accuracy than you will lose in information loss?

That decision has absolutely nothing to do with the form of scoring. If it is right to invite in one game, then it is absolutely correct to invite in both.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would happily bid three hearts over one spade. If I am going to play weak jump overcalls, and if I am white on red, why would I ever pass with the South hand?
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
5-3-3-2 hands, facing balanced shape, usually do better (at IMPs) playing in notrump. When South shows the five spades, and then bids 3NT, after, say, a 1NT opening, opener can assume no second suit.

That assumption is not so clear on this cramped auction. So, opener normally assumes that responder has some shape and wanted to play in the 5-3 fit.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, if partner is short in hearts and has a long suit, then I should get in? Isn't that partner's job?
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And Friday, I won a part-score swing when I competed to three hearts over their three clubs (even though RHO had bid a natural one heart over the double), holding QJ1074 in hearts and two small clubs. I knew they had nine or more clubs, and we had eight or more hearts. I would not make that bid playing with you.

You can't evaluate methods based on whether they worked out on a particular hand. If you use a treatment to cover a very large range of hands, then you will lose out when partner can't judge the hand, but gain by getting in more often.

There is always a trade-off balancing frequency with accuracy.
Sept. 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 173 174 175 176
.

Bottom Home Top