Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Wayne Burrows
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 26 27 28 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some other redoubles that I think are not SOS:


1. Directly after a takeout double 1x Dbl Rdbl usually to show values and also 2/3x Dbl Rdbl. After a pre-empt I play the Rdbl as cooperative.


2. Some sequences where XX is defined artificially: 1NT Dbl Rdbl might be a weak takeout; 2 Dbl Rdbl might be used artificially.


3. Most Rdbl after fourth seat doubles 1 P P Dbl; Rdbl but also after 2 P P Dbl; Rdbl I like to play as a good maximum partner might be able to compete or hit them based on this information. Possibly 1 P P Dbl; Rdbl could be played as short clubs although maybe advertising you are in trouble is wrong.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are many hands in response to 2NT that have slam interest but that are unsuitable for a key card ask. Therefore having a method focused around responder asking for key cards seems to be wrong to me.

I prefer a method where responder shows distributional features and opener judges how well the hands fit.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree. Sitting under the bidder a maximum and top cards seems like the normal hand for a double which partner can pass or pull.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A downside seems to be that you cannot make a negative double with only one major and say two cards in the other major unless you have considerable extra strength.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doug: This is something I have thought about over the past year or so when a director told me that a hesitation was UI and quoted the second sentence in Law 16B1. I asked him what the information was and he simply claimed it was the hesitation.

I think that is wrong. Maybe the confusion is because the law is poorly drafted.

It is true that a hesitation or rather a tempo could be used to convey information. It is not true that a tempo necessarily conveys information. And certainly not true that such information might suggest a call or play. If a pair or player is using tempo to convey additional information then that is much more serious than UI.

The wording in L16B1's first sentence essentially defines UI from partner. It is “extraneous information from partner that might suggest a call or play”.

I believe the second sentence should be interpreted as a list of examples of potential sources of that extraneous information and not as defining those actions as UI or even extraneous information. I think this should be obvious since many “remarks, questions, replies to questions …” do not and cannot provide UI (unless deliberately or through experience the information is codified.) For example “Explain the auction?” should ordinarily convey no UI.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rules like not opening with a side four card suit that are not based on empirical analysis are deeply flawed. Anyone can come up with a hand that is bad for a particular system or style but what matters is the long run expectation.

The hands that I have looked at single dummy suggested that it was better on average to open a weak two with a side four card major. The downside of a four card minor is much less. The upside of the preemptive effect is going to swamp the relatively unlikely loss from missing a club fit.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After 2 2NT we play:

3 any minimum
3 max with hearts
3 max with spades

Over 3 and 3 bidding three of the major is forcing and sets trumps. Therefore 4m is natural and forcing in a hand unsuitable for 3NT.

After 3

3 is artificial game force. Opener then bids their suit but some other structure is possible. Then 4m is natural and 4M is a slam try since if not then 4 below is used over 3.

3 is pass or correct. Similarly, 3.

4 is transfer me to your major.
Jan. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is precisely why you should play the trumps differently. You need to know how many trump losers you have before you take a position in spades.
Jan. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In reverse order:

6 is too much. If south has AKxxx then we still need good breaks and something good in clubs. With much more than AKxxx then south would have bid over 4.

5 is trying to land on a pinhead. I can't see how it can be long run winning strategy to offer a four card suit at the five level even vulnerable where the payoff is good if you are successful.

Double of 5 seems normal. As does pass of 4.

Double of 3 is okay but I would prefer 3NT with a balanced twenty and no ruffing value when partner is forced to bid one of your three card suits.
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An overtrick is worth less than one IMP - there is a chance of some aberrant result at the other table. Making our game vulnerable is usually worth nine or ten IMPs. Therefore, we have to make a lot of overtricks to justify going down once when we should have made on a line where there was a higher probability of making.
Jan. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not have time to flesh out the details but

1. At MPs I take the spade finesse. I might need to take it twice so I do not cash the ace or king first. If this wins then I can play a top trump and then if trumps are three two I can play two rounds of diamonds ace then queen in case they are 5-0. If diamonds are 4-1 then the hand with four diamonds might have three trumps. If trumps are not three two then I need to go to the diamond queen and repeat the trump finesse. I make if diamonds are not 0-5.

2. At IMPs I give some consideration to cashing AK now I make if trumps are 3-2, and diamonds are no worse than 4-1 or 5-0 onside. If there is stiff or doubleton queen then I can cope with a diamond loser. I haven't checked the numbers. Finessing spade makes if spade queen is onside and there is no diamond loser.
Jan. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Quite right. I did realise there was a sure trick in hearts.
Jan. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No partner has no extras to convert 7 to 7NT.
Jan. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
South did not pose a problem to me. South simply told me that they bid 7 and I asked for the auction.

I am not sure what you are referring to by “heavy burden”?
Jan. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was not my auction and I was not at the table but it was reported to me by the south at the table. He described 3 as fourth suit and he bid 3NT with a stopper. They were not a very regular partnership so it is possible they did not have a firm agreement.

I am not sure what he would have done with no heart stopper and especially if he had a singleton spade.

I have not had a strong well discussed precision partnership for many years. We played a version based on Alan Sontag's book. I am not sure what that says if anything about this sequence. In casual partnerships I play precision reasonably often and have had an in depth discussion but think that it would be commonly assumed among those partners that this was a version of fourth suit forcing.
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Probably a good move. 7 was making but even 6 scored 73% in this field.
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff, “class of player” is a test applied to the definition of logical alternative it is not applied to the test of whether or not something is demonstrably suggested.
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“5-0 diamonds and RHO holding the black guards seems insurmountable. But that is about it.”

You need more than that.

1. If either player has JTx then you are still cold.

2. If north has four or more hearts with the jack or the ten then there will be a three suit squeeze operating on the penultimate diamond.

Say with dummy having KJ9 KQ9 and declarer x x Jx Q then north will be ruined on the J with QT Jxx K.

So we need diamonds 5-0 so that hearts are blocked and north with both black suits held and south with a heart hold - four or more with the jack or ten.
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would play some system of transfers of 3NT which helps solve this problem.
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Except that “class of player” is nowhere defined.
Jan. 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 26 27 28 29
.

Bottom Home Top