Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bob Okker
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does 2 indicate extras?

If not, why not?
July 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In other words, almost unanimous.
June 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Other.

Either a 3 level splinter (invitational) or a 5 level splinter.
June 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I assumed by the OP that you were referring to a 4 level bid of a minor over 3 level preempts (or weak, preemptive 3 level raises). If so, then forcing.

Some of the responses seem to conflate “non-leaping” with regular Michaels.
June 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Except when your partner is GIB, who plays it as a weak and preemptive. :)

I've tried to convince him otherwise, but he refuses to listen!
June 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What then is 2?
June 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you have no luck here you might check with Frank Stewart. He co-wrote Sheinwold's articles for many years.
June 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or the Tom Jones 2NT — It's Not Unusual!
May 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're in the general neighborhood, Brad. It was this:

AJ8
KQT9742
-
A72
May 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“2 is . . . not even forcing.”

Huh?

Partner responded 1. 2 would be a jump-shift.

Can he pass? Of course. But that does not change the forcing nature of the bid.
May 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is 4 even forcing?
If not, should forcing bids be routed through 3?
Feb. 3, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course. But let's assume your agreement, sparse as it is, is simply “no leb.”
Jan. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 waiting.
3 does not deny a 4-card Major.
While you would like to trot out 5 as exclusion, it is undiscussed.
Nov. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is 3 forcing?
How many does it promise?
Oct. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or . . . what King does responder show for that matter!
Oct. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“At least it's much better than ‘4♣ always Gerber.’”
But now we have . . . ”4♣ is Razwood at all times.“

This is clearly superior to an opening 4 Gerber bid. Now, there is Razwood.

Also — It's never:
1) a preempt
2) a control bid
3) a suit preference
4) a splinter
5) Gerber
6) an attempt to sign off
7) any of the other myriad uses others use 4 for

I'm sorry but your own question above, ”When you are wanting to try a new convention, you must ask yourself, What am I gaining and what am I giving up?" points me in the direction of running as fast as possible from Razwood.
Oct. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, switch the s and s. Then cue bid your control. Oh . . . wait. Bummer.
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My first foray into the world of Razwood was a bit of a failure.
Holding the following:
AKQJ8 AQ QJT3 82
I opened 1 and partner forced game with 2. I rebid 3 and partner showed delayed support with 3 (agreeing trump). Holding a nice 19 count, and sitting opposite an opening hand with at least 3 card support, I figured it was time to trot out my new gadget, RAZWOOD!
My thinking was, if it’s good enough to fix the bidding missteps of “world class players,” it should work wonders for me.
So . . . I asked for key cards with 4. Partner showed 1 key card with 4 (we had decided to play 1430). Now, holding 4 of 5 keycards, AND the Queen of trump, I dutifully bid the slam — 6.
DOUBLE!
My LHO banged down the double card, which was followed shortly by the A and K.
Unfortunately, my silly partner had responded in a suit headed by the Queen. I’m now convinced he should not do this in the future, especially when the suit is s. Maybe I used Razwood incorrectly?
Either that, or possibly there is a way to check on missing controls before asking for key cards?
Any ideas?
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No director call?
Oct. 22, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does the fact that Mr. B has two hands double the probability of “stretching”?
Oct. 18, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top