Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Tom Townsend
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 129 130 131 132
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congratulations. We're privileged to have your expert assistance.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just a matter of partnership expectation. If we've agreed normal weak twos, I do not consider bidding.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A Lebensohl position for me, hence 2NT. Otherwise 3.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Routine adjustment to 7 doubled given the North hand.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Three low hearts will suit us fine.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No good deed goes unpunished.
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A bit harsh on a call (pass) that gained 12 IMPs. The lead was for five more.

My choices were a trash Multi and an 8-11 constructive 2. I didn't deem either appropriate.
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps I misunderstood and you did a manual simulation of the problem, in which case fair play.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The computer thinks the J or 10 best because declarer will duck a low-card lead in dummy with Qxx facing xxx.

I think Stayman except on (43)33 is a reasonable rule for simulations. As is no shortage in dummy, although there are obviously exceptions.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My point is that even the (nearly) worst holding is not too bad.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Diamonds will play OK facing 9-x-x, so any game-try should be in spades.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's right. Only 11 tricks. But 6 solid.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Six, with four and a singleton spade on dummy.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't pretend to know what's right on this one. My partner led J and declarer claimed 12. My hand was A108765 QJ5 1095 2, so it was a “good news, bad news” situation.
Jan. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There's also 98xx in dummy facing Ax in declarer's hand. Lead low and he's quite likely to win the ace, playing for a blockage.

Incidentally I think I'd rather lead a heart than the J.
Jan. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe leading a club honour to be a straight technical error. Almost never gains compared to a low club.

I led the 5 and dummy's 9 scored. Now we were fighting to save the second overtrick.

Between the major-suit leads, a heart must be the pick because of the non-double inference, and it was the winning lead. Partner had QJxxx and two entries.
Jan. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Should really be looking for seven but 6 is practical.
Jan. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a matter of practical IMP bridge, I think I do cash clubs and finesse the J, but why editorialise with the poll options?
Jan. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And 1NT is 14-16.
Jan. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I saw this method the other day:

3 = Checkback
3 = natural
Three of responder's bid major = natural, six-card suit
Three of the other major = clubs

Not much to remember and quite efficient. As I said in 2013, I don't care about bailing out.
Jan. 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 129 130 131 132
.

Bottom Home Top