Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Tim Luker

Tim Luker
Tim Luker
  • 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
April 3, 2014
Last Seen
Oct. 10, 2014
Member Type
Bridge Player
United States of America

Bridge Information

BBO Username
ACBL Ranking
Bronze Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
New suit after a responsive double is it forcing ?
Benoit, Lawrence has the same treatment in the 2nd edition of the book. It's not just a holdover from the old book; on page 121 of the new edition is the hand AKJ7 J53 AJ108 106. The auction is (1)-X-(2). In the new edition, Lawrence ...
New suit after a responsive double is it forcing ?
Don't get me wrong: I'm good with the "any 2 unbid suit" interpretation. I have just never seen any written source (including the Web, except here) that even discusses this alternative, as good as it may be. I have never read the Hughes book to which Benoit refers ...
petty little odius possibilities; PLOP
I like the 3-card raise idea. Lebensohl would be even better but I don't think it is ACBL GCC-legal. I'm not sure I want to be in a thin 3NT with 8+ hearts out against me, so I don't think I like natural.
New suit after a responsive double is it forcing ?
I can't find a single source that describes (1)-X-(2)-X as showing "any 2 unbid suits" or "3-suit takeout". Every source claims this double shows "majors". Standard may be shifting, but the nebulous 2-suit interpretation is not listed anywhere as standard.
Polly Siegel's bidding problem: KQ65 QJ96 54 QJ7
I follow 2 with 2NT. I would have doubled 1 at my first turn.
Better 2/1 Bidding -- The Nebulous 2!C bid
While I am not disputing the accuracy of Robert Lass's account of his favorable ruling, I will point out that the Nebulous 2 is clearly allowable under GCC RESPONSES AND REBIDS 3: "CONVENTIONAL RESPONSES WHICH GUARANTEE GAME FORCING OR BETTER VALUES. May NOT be part of a relay ...
No followers yet

Bottom Home Top