Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Steve Zolotow
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I hate pre-empting when I'm not sure whose hand it is. Give pard KTx AQxx xxxx Qx and we're cold for 3 N. If I did decide to pre-empt I'm not sure if the right plan is 4C followed by 4N if they bid 4 of a major or 5C at once & let them guess suit & level
Jan. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even playing 2/1 GF, I might consider starting with 2H, so I can show my suits
Jan. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Systemically 3D would be shortness, 4C would be a 5 card suit, 3H is better than 4H, although it is not clear if it shows a 6 card suit or a non-minimum
Jan. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Scoring well isn't based on picking what you think is the best bid, but on what you think the majority will pick. This reminds me of John Maynard Keynes theory the actions “of rational agents in a (stock) market using an analogy based on a fictional newspaper contest, in which entrants are asked to choose the six most attractive faces from a hundred photographs. Those who picked the most popular faces are then eligible for a prize.

A naive strategy would be to choose the face that, in the opinion of the entrant, is the most handsome. A more sophisticated contest entrant, wishing to maximize the chances of winning a prize, would think about what the majority perception of attractive is, and then make a selection based on some inference from his knowledge of public perceptions. This can be carried one step further to take into account the fact that other entrants would each have their own opinion of what public perceptions are. Thus the strategy can be extended to the next order and the next and so on, at each level attempting to predict the eventual outcome of the process based on the reasoning of other rational agents.”

In any case, we can congratulate them for scoring well, if not for bidding well.
Jan. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does this mean that Jxxxx QJ Kxx QJx is an clear 1S opening, but AKQT xxx xx Jxxx is not? I think one major consideration with a marginal opening is whether you want that suit led.
Dec. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I prefer double to show 4s & the over call 5. When it gets back to opener, he can rebid 1S with a 3 card suit or a 4 card suit & a really bad hand. If he has a reasonable hand with 4 spaces, he bids 2S, which is basically raising partners 1S to 2S.
Nov. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If shortage of copy is a problem they could probably get permission from any number of bridge writers or bridge publishers to print excerpts from their books, which would serve as more interesting content & as advertisements for the works. I'm sure there are any number of players (including myself) who would be happy to do an occasional column. And if as you say, they offer a free entry, they'd be flooded with stuff.
Nov. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If a pro who is a strong declarer plays with a client who is a weak declarer, they'll have ample opportunities to let the pro declare more. A semi-forcing NT by pro is passed by client, while with the same hand, the pro would find a rebid. Pro overcalls, but same hand client makes a take out double. Any hand involving a close choice of which suit, which game, etc. is resolved by not by minor factors in the hand, but by who will declare. As to upgrades to push hand into NT range, an optimistic pro is more likely than a pessimistic client to make them. This goes back to Victor Mollo's Hog, who added points for his skill when evaluating hands. None of this needs to be explicitly agreed between the client and pro, but could occur ‘naturally’ when one member of a partnership likes to hog hands, while the other doesn't.
Nov. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why would you bid when you have a great defensive hand with the perfect lead of a stiff diamond. If my hearts & diamonds were reversed then 3S makes more sense.
Nov. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming slam is possible, what is best way to explore? It certainly isn't 4H. I tried 3S which uses least room to see what pard does, but 4D might be more descriptive. The problem with both of those is pard might bid 4S then we might be getting too high
Nov. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A one deal sample doesn't mean much, but Yes pard had Kx of diamonds, and she bid 4D over 4C. I went down 2 undoubled for a great score (they're on a guess for 5C.)
Nov. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I once tried this & we always forgot in auctions like 1D 3C - it sounded like a club preempt & not top and bottom. Easier to remember & probably better is 1C 3C is a stopper ask with hand that expects to take a lot tricks if pard can stop clubs
Nov. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One diamond seems normal mp aggression. I think 1H is generally 5+, since pard knows I can pass. I certainly don't want to bid 1N with no stopper in their suit & no source of tricks.
Nov. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting idea to extend Drury to all situations in which there is an 3/4 open, followed by interference. Seems especially good at matchpoints, where you want to get lead & don't want to get too high
Nov. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What would 3D over 2C show? I know it uses up room vs. strong hand, but maybe it will work better than 2D often enough to make sense
Nov. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think I would have continued Ah at trick 2. It is much better when pard has a stiff & may help score trumps separately even when he has two hearts. I agree it is hard for declarer to get diamonds right after Qd shift, but he might. How should declarer proceed after he trumps Ah? Nothing I see saves him & he could easily go down 2.
Nov. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At least I wasn't the only one to think pard had doubled:)
Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I taught my dog how to play bridge, but there was a problem. Whenever he had a good hand, he wagged his tail.
Sept. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Keep number of boards the same, slightly more time per session, & shorten dinner break
Aug. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It might be hard to catch a cheating pair the first year they play. But in subsequent years, especially if many other top pairs report their suspicions to the NBO, then there should be some punishment. I'd suggest a 1 year suspension for every 2 years the cheats were allowed to play. Although this seems harsh for the local players who competed against the cheats, and may have actually been the first voice their suspicions to the NBO.
Aug. 16, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top