Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bob Scheidtmann
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am convinced that the only reason to bid over a strong club is when you have a long suit unbalanced hand or a 5-5 or better two suited hand. If opponents had opened a strong NT bidding a one suited hand makes sense, therefore I play that all 2 bids are the long suit hands. All one bids are specific two suiters with 1NT showing the non-touching suits.

Double of 1 Club shows Clubs and Diamonds
1 D shows Diamonds and Hearts
1 H shows Hearts and Spades
1 S shows Spades and Clubs
1 NT shows two non-touching suits, either clubs and hearts or diamonds and spades
Any 2 bid shows a six card suit

After 1D negative response, 4th hand has all bids except use 2NT to show both minors

Don't know if this is any named defense, but seems to show every combo cheaply.
Sept. 24, 2016
Bob Scheidtmann edited this comment Sept. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play reverse drury after 4th seat openers, so rebidding the suit shows a questionable opener.
After three passes a normal distribution has partner with 7-8 points, so two level may not be a total disaster.
June 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play that fourth seat two bids are strong, showing a six card suit and 15+ points. There does not seem to be any reason for pre-empts in that position.
June 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I pass and come in later. Been burned by opening a similar hand in past, since it was impossible to get partner to understand the limitations. Bidding 2H with a second 6 card suit is also problematic.
Jan. 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Simplicity is a big bonus for most intermediate players. Loss of the occasional 1100 is a price to pay. We double to show negative, because that gives opener the option of converting to penalty. Since they are the big hand, they are more likely to be in a position to judge.
One wrinkle that we play is after interference, 2NT by responder is positive and guarantees a first or second round stopper in opponent's suit. We came upon this the hard way when playing against an expert who kept us out of NT slam (when suit slam was not there) by bidding 2 spades over partner's 2C bid.
April 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have also noticed the same bidding, while watching the kibitz for a hand that I had played, did produce two different leads. I just assumed the first bot was the professional bot while the second bot was my 5 MP mentee. But it is only a game and at the real live table that happens as well.
April 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This sounds like a possible use of “Bid Coins”,. Oops meant Bit Coins. Nice April fool story.
April 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that the message here is find a system and make sure the partnership is on the same page. I have found that in a pairs competition, the brain drain is too much since you are only playing 2-3 hands against those opponents. In a team game, where you could be playing as many as 24 boards, we have a printed version of our agreement, which is Truscott, that we review before we start the round. Of course in the lower brackets 3 and above, we do not find many strong club systems. The problems occur in Swiss, where the opponents can be beginners or world champs.
March 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My interest is in the decision based upon peer players. How does the director decide who a peer of the player is. I was involved in a Bit by my partner at a recent regional. This partner is frequently slow in bidding, so I take little information from his delays. Whatever, the director said he asked four players for their thoughts and his decision was to deny me going on. When I asked why he said two players with about the same number of MP's would have passed, although the other two players who had significantly more MP's would have gone on. So it seemed that he was deciding that my peers were those with the same number of MP's, regardless of my ability or own expertise. I chalk this up to dismissing ability versus point accumulation. I knew I had no recourse, but wished he had at least considered that my ability might be more than my ranking of MP's.
Sept. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps the worst conventions are the ones only one player remembers. At the pro level with pages of system notes the discussions are very worthwhile.
At my level of Intermediate/Advanced play with as many as six different partners a month, every convention can prove fatal. So the gain has to outweigh the risk. While I agree that many of the conventions mentioned above are candidates for worst conventions, I usually agree to play those conventions my partners want and let the forgetting be my worry. The probability of any special convention coming up is quite small when considering only 26 boards.
In a 96 board team game, hopefully we have at least an hour to go over the special treatments.
May 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Letting results affect your bidding can cause you to do things that aren't the best. IMO passing is the better choice in the long run.
Sept. 10, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Polly, I agree with Brian, Mark and Joe. Your articles do bring up issues that the non-experts face all the time. Hearing the reasoning of the pros after your initial assessment will help all of us advancing players. I know there are several players at our club who play close to the 10.000 or more hands a year that you play. Your improvement is a witness to the efforts you put in. You are one of those that I try and judge my improvements by. One-quarter of the hands means I should improve at one quarter of the speed. Keep up the good work.
Sept. 1, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fast pairs does encourage players to go with their first impression. I hate it when my partner or an opponent goes into the tank in the middle of a hand. But on the other hand a minute to analyze the situation at the beginning of the hand doesn't bother me. Bidding delays are whole different kettle of fish. What determines a break in tempo is very subjective.
Aug. 28, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All this assumes that the only outcomes are win or loss. If your team can afford a tie to qualify for the play-offs, the more conservative approach may be the highest pay-off, ie. getting to the post-season.
And if you are talking college football, everything changes as there frequently are greater percentages for winning or losing. If you are a big under-dog, playing on the road, you would go for the two points, as your overtime percentage is probably pretty low.
Aug. 6, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not having discussed this, it would depend upon which partner I was playing with. Some play three-way game tries and I would then think that the double of the diamond bid reflected that was the bid partner had planned on making, therefore showing diamond shortness asking if that information improved my hand enough to go to game. If opponents had shown support, it would be a maximal double for sure.
Definitely an area to discuss in future with partners.
Feb. 7, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doesn't look like defending is a good alternative. Neg double might be better, but definitely have to do something.
Feb. 1, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Counting winners is a definite winner.
Jan. 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
First time I have responded. I would assume that my negative double showed the ten points and one 4 card major. Partner's jump shows 17-18 points 4 spades and not 4 hearts and I would treat as forcing. My 3NT bid would confirm that I did have 4 hearts and not spades. My club stopper is questionable, but with only 13 points available in RHO is probably good. Now partner it is up to you.
Jan. 29, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top