Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Steve Chen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While it is true that 3NT can be avoided if partner investigates on alternative strains, it is probably also true that, had the opener had a queen more, 3NT contract will have company in the field. So it is fair to say that 1NT opening with this hand tends to create anti-field result more often than 1 opening. Although opening 1NT looks normal, the state of match tells you to avoid creating this kind of swing.
Jan. 21, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's much more likely that total trick number is 16. The opponents likely have 9 diamonds, partner likely have 4-card major, so if I guess correctly we will be playing 4-3 fit (if I guess wrong it would be 3-3 fit). When partner has 5-card major he knows to bid it instead of X, unless there is no alternative.
I would estimate that bidding will much more likely turn plus to minus than pass resulting in -470. In MP one just has to respect the percentage. Even in IMP, you don't need 100% success rate to double. If they make 3D, double will lose 7 imps; if we turn +100 to -50/-100, that is 4/5 imps; if we turn +300 to -50, that is 8 imps. These are all possible results, latter ones being more likely.
Jan. 15, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The pass is not merely based on uncertainty on what to bid. This hand does have some defense. KQ and Q might take tricks (or help taking tricks), on a good day even trump JTx is worth a trick (not likely but possible). If this hand has same shape but no value at all, pass can still be right (based on LAW) but it is a lot more nervous position to take.
Jan. 15, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since 3 is forcing, why not use it? It's more to the point than an ambiguous 2 or 2. The fear that partner may forget and pass a forcing bid, is not a reason not to bid out the hand. This is MP so I give precedence to a major suit, while still keeping other strains in play.
Jan. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But do they have agreement on the difference between 1NT-3NT and 1NT-2NT-3-3NT?
Jan. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is partner required to pull 3NT with diamond void?
Jan. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So with a hand that has better diamond fit, East would bid 3 instead? Also, does this sequence show mild slam interest, or just choice of game? Does West have a way to show any shortness after partner's 3 bid?
Jan. 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What was range of 1NT? What was 2NT? What was 3?
Jan. 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Understood. But if the action resulted in playing 4-2 club fit instead of 4-5 heart fit, it's not going to score well no matter how much better is the pro in declaring. Maybe the pro is also counting on opponents to tell him whether he is in a wrong contract, plan to run to another strain if doubled…
Jan. 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pretty clear first-round double. Did you mean North bid 3 instead of X? That's a very strange bid.
Jan. 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cannot believe there are so many passers. Partner is making a serious game try, knowing that South passed initially. With this shape and void in opps suit, how can this hand be better in passed-hand context? I would even call the last-round pass (after X) being lazy.
Jan. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course.
Jan. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In BWS, after opener's reverse, if responder has support for the second suit but a weak hand, it is still possible to get out at 3-of-second-suit. So without discussion I wouldn't assume that 1 1 3 is forcing. Even if you make a case of this being forcing, would you treat 1 1 3 the same? And if you play 3 in that sequence as not forcing (but highly invitational of course), what would you bid this hand with hearts and diamonds switched, and biding goes 1 - 1? Would you reverse to 2 on a stiff?
Jan. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree on 2 earlier. But having bid 2, what's the difference between 4NT and 5 now?
Jan. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Next round may be tougher, when partner pulls the double to 5.
Jan. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The argument is a bit flawed: just because opener intended to reverse to 2 (which is one-round force) doesn't mean that the partnership is committed to anything higher than 3. That being said, I do agree that playing 3 as forcing has merits, but partnership needs to agree on this beforehand.
Jan. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was referring to your comment “so I can get back to partner with the S!3 after partner takes the S!A.” There you seemed to suggest that declarer didn't hold A.
Jan. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If declarer had nothing in spades, why did he not play K at trick 1?
Jan. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If E does bid 2, I think that FP should be on (since partner's reverse forces to at least 2NT/3), direct 3 or 3 would be competitive. I don't know if 3/3 would be absolutely forcing in this context, but in practice we are unlikely to stop at 3 or 3, given that my 1NT showed pretty narrow range and pattern. Yes double would be penalty.
Jan. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, personally I would just bid 4 with East hand. In any case it is worth at least a limit raise. But I am not too concerned about opponents underbidding and we pushing them. If they belong in game, our teammates will protect us. We would have lost an opportunity to gagner a few IMPs on this board, but we will likely beat them on other boards. To do this, I do need a partner that I can rely on for accurate bidding.
Jan. 7, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top