Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Steve Chen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ah, I didn't know this pair played Polish Club. I still dislike 1NT. If 3 shows a different hand, then maybe starting with 1 negative response is best.
Having bid 1NT, I would bid 3 next to mark the time. If 4 is the right contract we still have room to find it. Seems pretty obvious but I might be missing something…
Jan. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
XX would be OK if I had one less diamond and one more spade.
Jan. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's why people preempt. Even on first seat with AKxxx and out, it has some success rate (although not a frequent winner IMO). It's OK not to take 83% on every board…
Jan. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why not a straightforward 3 in first-round? The primary feature of this hand is club fit, plus it doesn't have any tenaces in either major suit.
Jan. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North's 1NT and 3 were ill-advised, therefore the end result cannot be used to judge how well each bid would fare had North bid more accurately.
Jan. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see any holdings where Q could cost (assuming declarer has at most 3 hearts as the stayman response suggests). It keeps all options open. What can other returns possibly gain?
Jan. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was already explained that FIRST double set up FP, South's pass over 2 was forcing…
Jan. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
X shows a strong balanced hand, I presume?
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All bids are flawed (in standard system). It's a question of which one sucks least.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depending on the actual treatment, second double can be takeout even if you play FP. With this treatment, over 2 double would be takeout, pass would be forcing (including a penalty hand but could have other types). The question is what immediate bid should show. I think it is better to use immediate bid to show weak hand with a suit, and probably lebensohl should apply. When pass then bid 2 after partner doubles, you are showing only 4 spades. Mildly encouraging hand can be shown by bidding the suit directly instead of going through 2NT lebensohl. It is reasonable to play FP over 2 but not 2.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think in standard, even 3 is not forcing (though highly invitational), just like 1 1 3.
2 being reverse (and force for one round) is playable, just not standard.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I realize that some people use 2? as showing extra, especially when 1? can be artificial (some play that 1? 1NT shows 8-10, so with 6-7 and 3334 shape they may have to temporize with 1?). But it is hardly standard. What does opener do with, say, 2245 shape and minimum hand, playing standard system?
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jan. 3, 2014
Steve Chen edited this comment Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because 2 now no longer shows a reverse?
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree that doubling has lots of benefits. But let's say that things don't work out as planned – partner bids 3NT or 4, what's your continuation?
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Much better to bid 4 one round earlier (leaping michaels to show + ). But this is up to partnership agreement, some still play 4 there as preemptive one-suiter, which is inferior IMO.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had this agreement with partner:
1M (P) 1NT (2X), Dbl would be takeout;
1m (P) 1NT (2X), Dbl would be penalty.
The reason is that 1NT response is more limited (in both strength and pattern) after 1m than 1M opening, so there is less need to use Dbl for competing.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
QJTx/AQx/x/KTxxx, that is a clear PASS. The responder should then consider competing in 3, knowing that partner is likely short in diamonds, there is no wastage there.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 clearly shows shortness in diamonds, willing to play a possible 4-3 fit because of ruffing value. With 2 diamonds, the hand either does not have enough to bid (12-14 range), or should double (18-19). I think X here shows strong balanced hand. 3 shows a decent hand, good hearts, stiff/void diamond, not willing to sell out in 3. It should imply good clubs as well. For the actual hand, the club suit quality is borderline. I do think 3 on this hand is a better choice than X.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner has spade fit, slam is not impossible even if partner has minimum. Plus this is MP, boss suit is too important to be ignored.

This is not like when partner opens 1, I may be in an awkward position if bidding goes 1 1 2. Here after 1 1, I don't have serious rebidding problem when partner has minimum hand. Yes, it will still be awkward if partner has a strong hand (say rebid 2NT after my 1), but that is not highly likely, and depending on the methods I may still be able to describe this hand sanely.
Jan. 3, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top