Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Paul Barden

Paul Barden
Paul Barden
  • 0
    Following
  • 13
    Followers
  • 17
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Aug. 20, 2015
Last Seen
9 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

EBU biography

Country
United Kingdom

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Way to Recover
Not that it affects Kit's argument, but 2.99% of hands are 4441.
Assess the blame (15)
When South has three hearts and four or more clubs, very likely hearts is the right strain for game, but clubs is better for slam.
Assess the blame (15)
If North has Kxx AKxxx x KQxx, 6 just needs clubs 3-2, whereas 6 needs a diamond trick also (opposite South's A10x QJx KJ10 A10xx). So why shouldn't South's 4 be natural?
Judges and Statistics
I strongly dislike reading political comments on this site. I disagree with some of what John Portwood writes, but I don't want to debate it here.
Assess the blame (15)
Craig's comment seems inconsistent. If it's a good idea for an so-far unlimited hand to be able to limit itself, and it is, why shouldn't 4 be the limited hand, and 4 be the serious slam try?
Assess the blame (15)
If South has that hand, he'll drive to slam after 4. It's not North's job to guess and do it for him.
Assess the blame (15)
If 3 showed a fragment South should have signed off in 4. But if, as I suspect, North would have bid the same way with x AKxxx Qxx KQxx, Suuth's 4 is optimistic but understandable. North had no business bidding 4 last train on his ...
Does a correction to 4H on this hand bar partner under current rules (ACBL)?
All your comments rely on wording different from the actual law. Which says "specify", not "show" or "offer". 3 suggests 3NT specifically as a possible contract - the specified denomination is No Trumps. On reflection I agree that 3 is too vague about denomination to be covered by this ...
Does a correction to 4H on this hand bar partner under current rules (ACBL)?
I meant under L27B1a. Which, I repeat, speaks of denominations, not suits, so the observation that 3 does not specify a suit does not tell us the answer.
Does a correction to 4H on this hand bar partner under current rules (ACBL)?
It the sequence in the OP, is it permissible to correct an insufficient 3 bid, suggesting a 3NT contract, to a sufficient 3NT bid, also (but more strongly) suggesting a 3NT contract?
Not following anyone yet
.

Bottom Home Top