Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Wayne Burrows
1 2 3 4 ... 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ... 66 67 68 69
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Weak field - below average tournament quality. You are playing with one of the best players in the field and your partnership would be one of a handful of favourites.

You can swap the A for the K so you don't need partner to have quite as good a hand as you are thinking.
Jan. 2, 2019
Wayne Burrows edited this comment Jan. 2, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you would need a specific partnership agreement. I would not expect that this was standard.
Jan. 2, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Related to this I use the raise of the fourth suit to show a hand with nothing to say but extra values. This will typically be a 2=2=5=4 hand with no heart stopper with around 15-17 hands. It is relatively rare but when it comes up responder can often place the contract.

Kx xx AQJxx AQxx opposite an ordinary AQxxx xxx Kxx Kx can play 4 or 5.

With the K - AQxxx Kxx Kxx Kx then 6 is 50% - and with the A AQxxx Axx Kxx Kx 7 is great.
Dec. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the opposite.

I already had a chance to double 1m for takeout so after 1m 1NT passed back to me the problem hand is a penalty double of the minor.

In contrast after 1m 1M 1NT now a more frequent problem hand is one where I am short in the major so double is takeout.
Dec. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That does not fit with 2 is game force in the opening post of this thread.

I like to play 1 1 2 3 as natural and game forcing at least 5-5. Weaker 55s are forced to choose pass, 2, or 2, or maybe 2NT if a bit stronger than your example.
Dec. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is not quite universal but the other side or aspect to Ron's comment in my experience is that those playing artificial methods are mostly much more willing to give accurate explanations. It has been players playing standard methods, including some very good players, who I have problems getting proper explanations from.
Dec. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My experience is only 30 years but it is the flip side that is the killer - my opponents have great success opening 4 on these hands.
Dec. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have heard this argument before but I am not convinced it is right to mislead about my heart length in the bidding and the play. If I open 2 then bid again, and I will bid again on most auctions after I open 2, partner will know my major suit length.
Dec. 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It maybe some sort of standard but I do not think it is best. I was not writing about what I thought everyone else did but how they can be catered for in another more flexible way.
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Leonard, 0454 and 1444 are low frequency hands. They can be catered for by bidding 2NT and then fourth suit rebidding 3.

1 1
2 2
2NT* 3**

* I have a stopper.

** Is your stopper a four-card suit?
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you always raise spades directly with three or jump rebid after fourth suit forcing or can 2 still be three?
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With 3=1=5=4 when I can bid both of my suits naturally and conveniently then I want some other excuse for raising spades. I am much more likely to raise spades with three with 3=1=4=5.
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like to use the cheapest response to include nothing to say so:

No heart stopper, no six diamonds, no five clubs, no extra values

or

A minimum hand with three spades.
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe south remembered their agreement after 2 had been bid. It legal to take corrective actions after you have realised you made a mistake at least in the absence of UI.
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was thinking about this some more this morning.

In my view it really is untenable to expect a right to trick one pause that is not sanctioned by the laws or RA. Allowing players to determine ad hoc that they will pause without consequence is the type of procedural variation that creates a window for cheats. Many of the recent cheating situations have involved the exploitation of variations of procedure. We need to work on eliminating such potential for variation.

As third player one could easily come up with a routine that would allow you to give information to partner based on a third hand tempo break and even something more sophisticated that would allow you to think about the whole hand unambiguously when needed.

A step in the right direction is to mandate a pause or if not to make any third hand pause subject to the usual UI restrictions.
Dec. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is a long time but I believe there was an adverse ruling in the Venice Cup in Perth 1989.

Declarer needs to be careful when he has nothing to think about at trick one with say stiff honour in his hand or an automatic play as does third hand. This is a situation that could be misleading and the laws require players to take special care in such situations.

I do not think that it is a good idea for some players to be able to define normal accepted procedure when the RA has chosen to not defined the procedure in that way.

Either the RA should mandate the pause or the players should pause at their own risk.
Dec. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The laws allow for mandated trick one pause but the Regulating Authorities as far as I am aware have not implemented such mandatory pauses.
Dec. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Otherwise, unintentionally to vary the tempo or manner in which a call or play is made is not an infraction. ”

If a player takes it on themselves to vary the tempo at trick one then they are not unintentionally varying the tempo.

“ Calls and plays should be made without
undue emphasis, mannerism or inflection,
and without undue hesitation or haste. But
Regulating Authorities may require mandatory
pauses, as on the first round of the auction, or
after a skip-bid warning, or on the first trick” L73A2.

If the RA does not make such a regulation then a player cannot lawfully act as if such a mandated pause is in place.
Dec. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I tend to agree with Nick.

Especially after a takeout double I think it is very common to have extra values and only three (or perhaps even two) card support for partner's bid suit. More so when the higher the level of the double when distributional requirements for the double are more often relaxed.
Dec. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Isn't there also a problem when doubler is 3=4 in the majors or 4=3 in the majors in the companion auction where partner bids 3?

This might depend on how you respond with 4=4 in the majors and not enough to force to game.
Dec. 24, 2018
1 2 3 4 ... 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ... 66 67 68 69
.

Bottom Home Top