Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Will Roper
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That they were considering 4 with a nice minimum……
March 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East was probably upset that South didn't bid 4 or 6…..
March 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is another advantage of 4…..

P-(1)-P-(3)

Obviously you now are going to bid 4. With 2245 or similar though partner will bid 4. Ie it is more comforting to pass these hands when your longer suit is hearts.

That said I wouldn't open 4.

W

P.S Shahzaad used to play a 3N opening = 65 in the majors or better….Bet he wished he hadn't dropped it when this hand comes up.
March 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
MPs…..
March 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree this isn't close. But you would pass with 6 also? At both vulns?
March 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The heart shortage would be a pretty telling clue, no?
March 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you think with (55)21 or (46)21 your RHO would bid over 2N vulnerable? If it's the probable no then you might want to only draw 2 trumps and keep alive the option of the ruff? Theoretically you can get to a similar stage in the play and keep this option open providing West has 2+D and 3+H. However, this may be trying to cater for too much.


"- If LHO is guarding diamonds, then he has already let his spade guard go and the king of diamonds followed by the last trump will complete a non-simultaneous double squeeze.”

You said RHO discarded a spade not LHO…

Therefore the AK and another spade is your best bet by default, I think.
March 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi George,

Before I say anything else:
1) I have played 1N as a strong bid in the past
2) I have read your article, twice.

This is a style thing. Its very archaic to me and therefore not for me. I do have several comments, which I wish to air:

1) A major advantage you did not mention is that the strong hand always declares the NT contracts. This is a huge pro. It means that auctions like 2-2-2-3-3-3N and many others don't wrong side the most important contract of them all.

2) There is a reason that BW offers the option to add pages. By segregating your work into various pages would make it far easier to read and far more people would find it beneficial and/or interesting. You are shooting yourself in the foot by not taking advantage of this resource.

3) System promoters are always going to be in a minority. It takes time to learn, which should be invested in cardplay. In order to “sell” a system as you are trying to do, one of the most important thing is your example hands. These demonstrate a systems advantages over its competitors. Barring the competitive bidding hand (B12) which has various tangibles you can construct NORMAL auctions playing standard FOR ALL THESE HANDS which reach an optimal spot.

4) You obviously don't care about what anyone thinks of you or your methods. But lets be honest:
4a) How much of this is theoretical? If you want to stop me from calling it archaic and largely unplayable, go out and play it, or if you don't want to play get others to. Because you don't buy a horse until you have ridden it and currently your system is a wild pony.
4b) You are essentially trying to sell your idea. How many successful salesmen do you know who are rude to their clients.

If you want to be rude to me about this post, go ahead, I frankly don't care, nor will anyone else.

W

P.s If you want me to post auctions of standard sequences getting to the right spot, with minimal gadgetry, I will happily do so. Most involve 1m-P or 2-2-2!N
March 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Like Michael I do play: 1-2 as a balanced GF with one partner

It not only hides the major holdings but also allows you to put some more work into right siding the final contract.

The loss of a Weak 2 jump is nothing to mourn over.
March 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If minor set:

a) Below 4m - 4m = I have the QT, Higher = I don't have the QT
b) at 4m - As per normal Turbo
c) above 4m - I don't play Turbo here I am afraid

If major set:
a) by or below 3M - we play a variant of “baby turbo” such that 4N = QT and Higher = I don't have the QT
b) Above 3M but below 4M - As per normal Turbo
March 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“So with 4H,S can not bid 2H with 4H”

Correct unless they are treating 4 as 5. E.g AKQx
……………….
“Any time that you open 1H in “std” and bid another suit aren't you unbalanced?”

You are. Don't really see the relevance of this. Our 1 opening is unbalanced
……………………
“Maybe I should have said the unbalanced amorphous club system?”

We have our own name for it. However any rights for the system should go to Sabine Auken and Roy Welland who invented and play it.
……………………
“Of course, you alert the opponents about your bids when they occur or do you?”

This isn't my first rodeo with an exotic system. For example in the UK it is not alertable to alert a 1 opening that isn't forcing in nature. However since we could open 1 with unusual semi-balanced shapes (e.g AQxxx, Qxxx, Qx, Qx ) we alert it anyway to warn opponents.
Feb. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“If partner had H wouldn't he bid them, especially if he had 3+ clubs?”

1 opening if that is what you are referring to promises 5+ and an unbalanced hand usually.

2 over 2 would promise a balanced/semi-balanced hand with 5
Feb. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your guess is as good as mine.

I would say nice cards as a general principle. I would also say that our general agreements tend to be quite aggressive as can be seen from the 10 count openings.
Feb. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We have got this far…. I assume we revert to standard here.
Feb. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play this after seeing it published in Martens system and also played by a lot of expert partnerships. Its big advantage comes on shapely weak hands where partner can bid 4M now as they know they have an 8 or 9 card fit.

E.g
AJTxx
-
xxx
xxxxx
opposite a strong NT
Feb. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One good principle to adopt is that neither side can force the other to sit the double. I play two modified runout methods I like, but the one more pertinent to this discussion is:

Pass = Semi-forcing (can be passed out on 4(333)s and soft (4432)s

(Opener's other options over pass: XX to initiate a Baron style sequence or Bids a 5 card suit)

XX = Clubs or Two suited without clubs

2 = Clubs + a higher suit

2/2/2 = Natural
Feb. 12, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Both minors
Feb. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My partner held this hand after a similarish start (he had shown 13+ with (6)7+ and I had shown 6+4+).

He thought 4 was clear, however at MPs I thought you want to play in when partner is 74 ergo why I am voting 3.

fyi it is interesting what my hand should bid over 4 :)
Feb. 3, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
probs too late and am missing something obvious….

Club up to sever opps comms. Planning for 5=1 break and hope this gets opps to misdefend some 4-1 breaks.
Jan. 31, 2016
Will Roper edited this comment Feb. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Facepalm
Jan. 31, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top