Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Will Roper
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My head tells me one of 3, 6 or 8. Although only a fool actively bets against 1 or 2.
April 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Done this and it wasn't pretty. SPL opposite SPL!
April 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks. I am guessing by the general lack of comments that either:

a) I have finally made an article with no gaps/mistakes in it or
b) I have finally made an article which has put everyone to sleep
April 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I clearly do not have any idea of global trends. All the circles I run in seem to play this as a FJ and would argue it as automatic. Having never bothered to properly learn or play FJ, I thought I was simply out of touch with the correct approach.
April 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought this vote would be 99-1 against me. Still expect it to shift heavily towards FJ as time progresses.
April 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Drat I forgot the trials were coming up. Event I love to watch right at the time I am meant to be revising!
April 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Any hand which works for line 2 would have:

a) not led a trump (especially one as pivotal as the T)
b) bid 2 rather than doubling
April 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Keeping strictly to the hand isn't double T/O by West? If it is then I am very confused as to the problem.
April 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Again I agree with MR's style and think it is worth adding that if you preference 3 with better diamonds this is also a case for bidding 2N with certain hands that do have slight preference for a minor. E.g 3-3-3-4.
April 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with MR that rulings seem to have gone down a dark path. Instead of restoring equity we are now left with people using them to gain left, right and centre.

I do think that partner should not be allowed to ask that question. If they are allowed then they should always be asking in theory, a practice that virtually no-one adheres to.

Is this truly a worrying loophole in the rules? It is a somewhat abstract and cynical view. It brings to mind the Mollo hand where the Rabbit revokes and loses two tricks but gains 3. Modern rules obviously solve that issue as it was thought that an unethical player could do this feasibly. However, here we have a defensive player in a position where they have to guess whether their partners major penalty card is more costly then the revoke penalty. When you add in time constraints/morals, I think this situation is highly unfeasible and not worth worrying too much over.

But hey, to each their own.
April 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like how I am trying to identify flaws in my own methods at 1am :) Here goes.

> Helps them to penalise: By putting weak hands through the slow route you give them multiple ways to penalise. They are less likely to do this against a GT hand.

> Helps the defence: Expanding on the previous point. Going slowly inherrently uncovers slightly more information than the quick route. The hands where this is more likely to help them are the ones where our combined assets are weaker. Admittedly this could be seen as a positive to a player whose plays mostly imps with thin game bidding.

> Scramble destination: With some hands the identification of a, larger than expected, double fit could make blasting game more attractive.

> General logic/understanding. People play 2N as a good raise. You don't play 1-(2)-?: 2N = Weak and 3=INV as a general rule of thumb. Similarly the default after 1-(4)-4N seems to be:
a) Good raise/RKCB
b) The minors
c) Combination of a and b
d) Other

As I said, certain non systemic partners adhere to this style that artificial scrambling NT contain good raises and are prone to forgetting the reverse.
April 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Second time I have seen the basis of this idea bandied around this week. The other was a bit more simplistic in that it suggested after direct interference over a short club they played as if partner hadn't opened.

I like the basis of the idea, particularly that you aren't using 2N for a transfer starter. I am just imagining the chaos it would cause if I included it in my system:
1-(1)-2*-(P)
2**

2 = Transfer to Diamonds
2 = Transfer to Clubs

Not for the faint hearted!!!
April 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with most of the above and did in my initial post. The major reason we inverted 3 initially was symmetry with our 4N=weak T/O approach.

As to the proposed alternative to Lebensohl, this is what I play already over weak 2s where it is more effective as a tool. It still has some upsides against regular Leb in this position though.
April 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are arguments to both sides.

I usually play Scrambling similar to what Michael R suggests above. Can be a bit of a nightmare with some partners who forget we reverse the 3 bid. I don't find I miss (m)any games with this approach and it is very useful at MP so I have stuck with it.

If I was to play Lebensohl here (and I have considered it) then I think I would invert the meanings:

2N = INV+; F1
3m = Weak
3 = Weak

I think this also has merit over (2)-X-(P)-?.
April 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not a fan of 4 at matchpoints. If you go down that route you might as well just blast 6.

4 = Marginal. Aceless and minimal. But the 6th Club is useful and you know partner has 0-1.

4N = …. I imagine without discussion it will be taken as 1430 or a slam-try. I don't have much more than my original slam-try. Perhaps I am regretting my 4 bid. In for a penny, in for a pound.

6 = Well 5 is apparently either 1KC (or do you play 3041?) or a sign-off. Why do I bid 6 over either.

I also would have opened 3 on the East cards which might not work very well here.

Interesting bidding problem as to whether North should drop 3N after 2-3-3-X-P-3N-P-?.
April 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nope :)
April 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know this and have used it to great effect in the past. The problem is I simply don't think opposite my partners that we are beating 2x. Those hands would usually open. 2xx or 2x+1/+2 are still reasonable swings in the out column.

At teams I don't like competing for dead rubber part-score boards. The risk-reward ratio's simply don't stack up.
April 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Firstly I think it must be right on DD defence to play the A. If you mis-guess and they are 2-2 then there are some positions where you are now just off. If East has both minor kings then a club will seal your fate. A diamond will put you to a guess. Meanwhile if you mis-guess and they are 3-1 then there is plenty of play still in the hand. Hence A.

So thats T3 sorted. So now we know that are 1-3. If East holds both minor Kings it is right to play another trump. This stops West from blocking our comms and allows us to get to this four card ending or similar:
-
-
AQ
Qx
<>>>> -
<>>>> -
<>>>> Kx
<>>>> Kx
-
x
x
xx

On the last heart you can throw a club and either pick up stiff K or throw East in.

Whilst this play is neat, it only really is right to play a trump if East has both minor Kings. A better play at T4 is a spade up. This works on two levels:

a) Gives us the spade count
b) Puts West to the test immediately. If they don’t duck then we can still always get to the above ending.

This leaves you well placed. Will happily guess what to do next but first I need to know what have the opponents played thus far.
April 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How do we know East has xx. Do people not lead from KQx these days? Would be surprised if LHO had KQxxx + stiff + possible minor king and didn't bid 1 as a passed hand.
April 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting hand. Am pretty on the fence. I decided pass as my partners tend to be pretty aggressive. Also expect 2 to get passed out too often. Would definitely compete at MP.
April 20, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top