Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Wayne Burrows
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 36 37 38 39
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And they would be entitled to know whether your preempt is on rubbish or sound - by which I mean the partnership agreement not the particular hand.

So if you disclose that you preempt on Jxxxx and out they are allowed to agree to play penalty doubles and if you disclose that your minimum is KQJTxxx they can agree takeout doubles.

You can't force them to tell you what they play over your bid without first telling them what your bid means. That would lead to an infinite loop otherwise.
July 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is what I thought. The boundary of where such an excellent high card hand is what I thought I was interested in.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I certainly redouble often in spots like this with maximum balanced hands. I thought the singleton diamond was a flaw but I wasn't convinced that it was a fatal flaw.

I will do some simulations to get a feel for how likely the stack is compared with a hand with around eight points and no heart fit. I too think the stack that was going to pass is relatively unlikely before looking at any large sample of hands consistent with this auction.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You probably need a method to check for a five-card heart suit if 1NT can have five hearts reasonably often.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think I should be able to decide that
JT9, T98, KQJT9, KT
is worth 10 (or more) and that
K32, Q432, KJ32, KJ
is worth 12 (or less?)

This reasoning is flawed because if you can use your judgement to upgrade one sort of hand why can't I use a different judgement to upgrade completely different hands. Who says your judgement is better than another. The only fair way is to allow everyone's judgement good or bad. The scores will take care of whose judgement is good and whose is bad.

Different players have different tendencies about upgrades and downgrades; these could be checkboxes on a system card - never, occasional, frequent, very aggressive

Those checkboxes will not differentiate the myriad of different judgements that are employed.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not sure about greater value which is hard to determine without knowing the rest of the structure but a weak hand with both minors is probably about 2:1 compared with a hand with extra values.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think 3 is wrong as it is needed as non-forcing. Opener can be distributional with clubs and responder will also usually have clubs.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you can be less sure about a favourable first seat 4 opening than many other auctions. I think that is either not stating the obvious or a flaw in your argument Richard.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don't open 2 if you think this is a problem rebid.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder if it is sensible for a player who has passed as here to use 4NT as both minors. Then 4 can be four spades and a minor.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can't be sure of this. There is a wide range of hands that some would open 4 and some take some other action especially at this vulnerability. I would not be so confident that the field is opening 4.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not see the material difference between seeking advice by discussing a case in person and discussing the case publicly. You may get information that you can use to persuade a committee or even get information that encourages you to discontinue your appeal.
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. It is not clear precisely what he has admitted. As far as I can tell he admitted using his phone but it is not public knowledge what he was using it for.

2. His ratings were also artificially inflated because he played weaker tournaments. Apparently there is an anomoly in the rating system where if you beat someone more than 400 rating points lower it is rated as if they were exactly 400 points lower and so he could inflate his rating by playing a lot against much weaker opponents and rarely if ever against similarly rated players.
July 13
$20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I agreed with partner to bid 1 I do so, if I agreed not to then I do not. Otherwise I exercise my discretion and I expect that pretty soon we will have an agreement.
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the need to rebid 3 with fewer than four diamonds. If there is a need then it should be very rare and diminished even further with the use of modern gadgets like Gazilli variants.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Before robots can play bridge against humans there needs to be a way to communicate information about bids and plays from one to the other. That is a long way off and will not be solved by a computer playing against itself.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. Regulations that limit judgement are misguided at best.

2. In particular regulations that require a person to use hcp to determine whether their judgement is restricted are flawed.

3. There is a huge difference tactically between first seat favourable and various seats unfavourable in what hands you should open.
July 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is 1d 3 or 4 plus?
July 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously an advantage. But you better never bid Blackwood with none and here 0 or 3 as you will be in slam off two aces. (Or if hearts are trumps here 1 or 4 and not be able to ask for the trump queen and choose to try and signoff).
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kieran the problem might be that partner knows 0/1 are literally impossible but you don't know that he knows. Then when partner bids 5Major you do not know if that is because he knows you have three (or four) and decides that is not enough - some people do decide it is not enough with one missing as much as others think that is illogical - or whether partner is unsure whether you have 0/1 or 3/4. And you have no way of knowing unless partner hesitates before 5Major.
July 9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 36 37 38 39
.

Bottom Home Top