Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Will Roper
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Simple Q Chris:
What are the Pro's & Con's (if you don't know the latter then hypothesis) of this method compared to standard & standard Gazilli in simple bullet point terms. I am afraid I have only skimmed through what seems like a nice article as I have just started my 4 years of drinking……I mean learning. I.e why should I take this up :)
Sept. 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed. If I was going to take up this method (I have been considering something similar), then transfers are the way to go. Far more uniformity for 1M - 1NT rather than 1H-1NT, 1S -1NT. Add in Kaplan Inversion if that to your taste and you have a nice system.
Sept. 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner can easily have a hand which 6/7m is cold. 4/4 seem obvious with 4 being slightly better since you can ruff the good if partner has something like Axx,xx,Ax,AKQxxx
Sept. 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only a club evening but recently played 26 boards and got just over 70%…..Came second…..
Sept. 12, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So dummy has :) I rectify my statement to declarer cannot have KQ9

However this doesn't affect the validity of declarer running some diamonds first before hearts.

If declarer had KQ10 and LHO ditched their spades on the the diamonds we wouldn't care. 2 (Q & 10), 6 & 1 = 9
Sept. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes this could be the case. But with this hand declarer could
a) play the Q trying to lure us into ducking instead of blatantly playing the K

b) They need exactly KQx in hearts for this line to make sense. If they held KQ10 then they could draw diamonds and play KH endplaying us immediately. Even with this hand they would probably play several diamonds early. Imagine if we had led from: Q10xx,A,xxxx,QJxx. Now we would be endplayed automatically on the play of the heart. However if they play the heart immediately they let us off scot free.
Sept. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I ducked also on the additional possibility declarer has something like:
0454 or 1444 with a diamond holding such as AQJx or AKJ10 and needs to repeatedly finesse partner's diamonds (10 could be a crucial entry). Unless declarer has something ridiculous like void spade and 7 solid diamonds then it is unlikely that ducking one round will give the contract. If declarer then plays the Q I am back into the tank :)
Sept. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure (I am halfway through rewriting the system file and shortening it for you/everyone btw).

Of the opening bids in Fantunes 1 is the strongest in competition in my eyes. 2 though is probably the weakest of the 2 level openings so divesting the shape into various bids will be good.

In my eyes it is a simple question of which problem is greater:
-Being able to open trashy two level openings (not really important as gd players can defend the Multi)
-More accurate competition over the 1 opening (although note it won't be as accurate as say Fantunes as partner will still assume you to have the balanced weak NT) & more preemptive intermediate 2m openings.

The other advantage which people don't really consider but I experienced a lot when I played artificial minors is leads. Say you open 1 and the opps preempt 3 and thats where it rests. Partner now assumed you had diamonds a lot of the time and makes a really poor lead compared to the one which they would have chosen were you balanced.

On that note have you considered a wider/higher range i.e 10-14 or 11-14 as with 14-15 unbalanced you still won't necessarily compete in these auctions when you want to in order to define your hand?

2 doubled is a nice touch! :)
Sept. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
presumably 2 = 6+ unless 5 4

Should work nicely. Is it worth getting rid of the trash multi for it….. I don't know

Only thing to worry about is hands worry about is when it goes 1 - 1M - 2 - AP or competition in standard whilst here you open 2 and partner plays a misfitting 2 assuming you will normally have 6+……its reasonably rare though (I think the odds say you will hit a 5-2 or better diamond fit over 60% of the time)

I don't think you lose much definition from the 2 bid by adding essentially a intermediate 2 to it so I would keep it as is above if you decide to add it.

As an interesting sidenote, a friend of mine developed a system recently which involved a balanced 1 opening. I.E 1 = 12-13 or 17-19, 1 = 14-16 for the balanced hands. 1NT/2/2!/D catered for the hands with diamonds unbalanced. Don't know if this helps your thinking.
Sept. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This was a partnership only in its 5th outing odd in 8 months :) With my regular partner it would have started the equivalent hands (we play a weak NT & Forcing 1) would go slightly differently - 1 - (1) - X - (2) - 2 - (3)

Here X shows an invite with at most 1 4CM and the 2 bid is natural and constructive. We now have defined our hand a lot better and can pass knowing partner can penalise should they wish.

The auction here is far better defined as we have shown invite/GF hands and we can now pass and let partner judge the situation.

The auction we had didn't define my hand as well. For the same amount of space I could be Competitive/Invitational/GF for all partner knows. Whilst I fit into the competitive category I am top end and a pass would misrepresent my values. At teams its fine. At pairs its suicide.
Sept. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are quite right Frances in that they do not specify the meaning of first round of the auction.

Looking at the outdated laws from 2007 all I can find is these definitions:
Auction — The process of determining the contract by means of
successive calls. It begins when the first call is made.
Call — Any bid, double, redouble or pass.

The key word is call and not bid. I.e the auction starts with the first call. I assume although cannot be certain that the EBU defines that the auction starts with the first bid.

This has affected me in the past hence the above comment:
Playing in a WBF cat 3 event I was advised by an opposing player (then the director) that 4NT was alertable in the sequence. p-p-1S-X-4S-4NT. Subsequent to the event I asked Barrie Partridge who is an EBU director & Chief TD on Bridge Club Live (which obeys WBF laws) for clarification and he gave the one I gave above.

Regards,

Will
Sept. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This depends on WBF/EBU regulations as far as I am aware.

Take the simpler auction 1 - p - 4
In both EBUland and WBFland (without screens) the 4 bid is alertable as it is the first round of the auction.

If you were to add 3 passes in before the bids though: i,e p-p-p-1-p-4
In WBF land this no longer is alertable as they constitute the last bid in the first round of the auction to be 1. In EBUland it is alertable as they constitute the first round of the auction to begin when someone bids. I.e 1 for them is the where the “first round of the auction” starts and 4 is alertable.

So my choice of which bid is the last bid depends on what regulations I am playing under.
Sept. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wasn't sure if we played better minor or short club ;)
Sept. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do I really want to play in 4 though? As it turns out double dummy I don't as on a passive defence (3) then it is impossible to make 4. Even looking at my hand I can put partner with 12-13HCP balanced a lot of the time and 4 goes 1/2 off when 3 also goes off….. Give me 3415 shape and I would be more tempted to bid 4
Sept. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard,

I too play a modified variant of Fantunes and would prefer a Strong NT to a Weak NT (coming from a solid 2/1 base). However unfortunately switching them over does have a major repercussion on some of your other opening bids as well. Whilst 1 will not be affected 1/1 might be?

What do you open with:
AK10xx
Qxx
xxx
Kx

If the solution to this is 1 then this destroys one of the main principles Fantunes were built on:
- Dealing with competitive bidding with solid opening bids (13+ openers which you have adopted whilst reasonable are not as effective in my view).
- Colours first. If you open the above 1 then that is no longer in effect.


Solve this and I think you are onto a winner.

Regards,

Will
Sept. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I held an odd hand (not one I would expect had I held the above cards):

xx
10xxx
xx
AKQxx

My feeling at the table was that partner had stated their hand and the auction would live or die with me. At teams it would be an easy pass but at pairs I didn't think taking 3D 1 or 2 off would score much NV (3 goes 2 off but you need to under lead you AKQ). I doubled thinking that partner would take it as a invite+ values double and convert often for penalties and/or bid game if they thought they had enough.

3 then confused me as partner knew I didn't have 4 (See John's comment above). I decided 4 was the best option now and partner found the pass card. On a slight misdefence this rolled in for all the match points.
Sept. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well partner knows you want to probably play in Diamonds/Spades/NTs after that. It depends who takes control with the Serious/Non Serious/RKCB options. If they take control you will always get to choose between Spades/NT which are likely to be better contracts than diamonds anyway based on your hand. If you take control then all 3 spots are open to you.

I like the 3 waiting option btw. I assumed all this is as you play 2 level xfers.
Sept. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Did we consider bidding 3 over 3? I know we only have 2 but they are powerful and the subsequent auction will much more informative than after a denial? 4 is bound to play as well as 3NT and it gives more space for slam bidding/the methods over 3S are much better defined than after 3 I would expect?

General question: What do you play 3 as over 3. If 6, 5+ which seems logical, won't you wrong side some 3NT contracts with say AJ10xx, xx, KQJxx,x (1-2-3-3-3 - ?)
Sept. 2, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At the table 3 was chosen (which I don't think is a bad bid):

My hand was perfect:

AKxxx
AQ9x
Jxx
x

However holding 3, playing MPs I couldn't see any reason to bid the cold 4. As a result we got a rather undeserved 8%. At other tables South presumably doubled with their 18 count and it will have gone something like 1 - (X) - 2 - (p) - 3 - (p) - 4.

This has led me to look into alternative methods of showing mixed (7-9HCP) raises in these situations. I like Jack's method above as it is easy to remember. However the fact that it doesn't work in several situations complicates rules.

Yuan Shen previously posted an excellent article on 2NT as a good or bad raise to 3. As he pointed out the main problem lay with 2NT not preempting opponents enough. Opponents now have a chance to double 2NT saying they definitely want to penalise. Bid a NS at the 3 level or pass and double with competitive values. Also on this hand it will go 3 by partner as a mixed raise and it is still not clear to raise to 4 particularly at pairs.

The best method probably lies somewhere between these two methods. 2NT should be a good raise in my opinion as it obeys the stronger hands bid lower principle. If I was playing Jack's method it is debatable whether you should reverse the meanings of the 3 and 3 bid to something along these lines:

2NT = 10+HCP 4+ card support
3cue = 7-9HCP 4+card support
3suit below major = 10+HCP 3 card support

This has the advantage that in auctions such as this it will go:
1 - (2) - 3 and now we have space for 3 as a general invite asking how good is you mixed raise. Therefore which is which depends on when you will need to invite more. I don't know for certain (my mind is leaning slightly towards the 3 card support with 10+ but it is marginal).


Sept. 2, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How would one bid then if it had gone 1H - (2D) or 1S - (2H)?
Sept. 1, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top