Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Wayne Burrows
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems reasonable.

However obviously there is a problem if you do not always bid slowly. In general I am willing to accept that the tempo in a slam auction is different than the tempo in many non-slam auctions. The problem occurs when the tempo varies.

When the problem hand occurred the Blackwood responder said her partner would have to check whether one was possible. With his hand opposite her 15-17 one was impossible but he still bid 5S slowly.

It seems to me if he always bids 5S and she always goes on then there is no need for checking unless they have some other unusual agreement like 5H would be a puppet to 5S.

If he bids a slow 5S when he knows they have thirteen on top then he is just creating problems for himself and his partnership. Moreover it seems the only reason for the slowness if she is expected to always bid on is to remind her that she needs to bid on.

That is he has conveyed his information with 4NT that we are definitely going to slam if you have three or four. So after a 5C or 5D response there is no need to think except to make sure partner is awake.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The idea that you should ideally not have two losers in a suit to bid Gerber or Blackwood without knowing partner has a control should be mainstream and not a secret kept by so-called experts.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or he misbid and the hesitation prompted the raise.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Then try 4nt.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ridiculous.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry I was trying to be generic rather than looking at exceptions or specifics. I agree with Nigel Kearney above that each case should be treated on its own merits.

Nevertheless, it is good to have generalities before looking at specific variations.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Summary of my thoughts:

1. Thanks for all of the comments and votes.

2. Sorry for not giving an other category. However, while I realised there were other options, for example Nigel Kearney's response above and differences between 3 or 4 and hearts and spades, I wanted to encourage a dichotomy of responses.

3. There seem to be two schools of thoughts about Blackwood:

i/ Always bid on with 3 or 4

ii/ Asker should always know whether partner has zero or three, or one or four and therefore responder should never bid on.

4. However, there is also a reasonable school of thought that if you are missing one key card (and not the queen of trumps) then you should be bidding slam. That diminishes the problem to when you show four and when hearts (or rather not spades if we extend the situation to some minor agreement auctions) are trumps and responder to Blackwood is missing the trump queen.

5. In another thread https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/carding-dilemma/">Carding Dilemma Richard Pavlicek makes what I consider the astute comment “Slow, deliberate plays like this are made by the masses for one reason: to ensure partner's attention.” Although to be fair there might be times where that is not true and partner has some other problem. But the comment in that thread about the very long time suggests otherwise for that particular case.

Similarly, slow deliberate returns to 5M could easily be used or seen to be used as waking partner up. I will probably write another thread about this from a tournament director's perspective.

6. There is a possible ambiguity when responder cannot tell whether partner has zero or one, or three or four. That problem is solved by the autowood (a new word for me) proponents by always bidding on with the higher number.

7. However then there is a problem when Blackwooder can tell and then bids 5M anyway. I will address and poll this in another article.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Answers should be clear especially to basic questions like this. Having to dig further creates unnecessary problems. Players who repeated do not give full answers should be stamped on (figuratively speaking).
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 a round earlier please
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is no reason to not ask “what are your leads?”
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“high quality poll”

After some recent experiences I wonder whether there is such a thing.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or 3 is a transfer to 3.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What is your 1NT range? Or rather what balanced hands can go into 1?

I hope that you describe 1 better at the table.

“1D is 2+, ~11-15 HCP. (May be 2D and 5C.)” is seriously incomplete.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Weak 2H bidder definitely has a 2-card suit.”

I do not understand what this means?

Do you not open 2 with 3=6=3=1 and similar?
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My agreements are I can show the void at the four-level in a one-under fashion. I can then bid 4NT as key card but excluding the ace in the void suit. If I find two key cards I can then ask for the third round club control.

If I am off a key card and third round club control then bad luck I am playing in six.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Double is all I can do with extra values and no sensible bid which is precisely what I have.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not even convinced that double shows any more length. Hence I think I have to bid 4 now.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We really need to know the system agreements to answer this question.

If 2NT is Jacoby I would like to show my diamond void and then key-card but I do not know your system.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you choose to invite with six diamonds and then partner bids 3 then I think another reasonable option is for responder to bid 4.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 is crazy. North raises because 4 showed five or preferably six hearts.
July 7
.

Bottom Home Top