Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Buddy Hanby
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 86 87 88 89
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is David Burn a reincarnation of Calvin Coolidge?
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 at this point doesn't show a heart suit. It's a slam try in spades. There are perfect maximum hands where 6 is a good contract, but I'm worried about reaching slam on other hands where it's a poor contract.
21 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm with John on this one–a bit confused. The main reason that I would consider playing new suits forcing after an overcall is to find a 4-4 major fit after a 1 or 1 overcall. However, it seems like most of the people who play this style don't bid weak 4-card majors in response to an overcall. Frances X's with 4-5 major hands, avoiding missing 4-4 spade fits but risking missing 5-3 heart fits, just like new suit non-forcing players. This seems to me to defeat the main purpose of playing a new suit forcing.

The only other advantage of new suit forcing seems to be making a cue bid always promise support. This advantage seems minor because hands requiring a cue bid without support are very rare. (For me, they are essentially non-existent because my partner insists on playing jump shifts in response to an overcall forcing).

Richard M. sees a different advantage. He writes “those who play non-forcing are indeed compelled to play two different systems, depending on which side opened the bidding.” I don't see how this can really be true. Maybe if your normal system is very old-fashioned, but can you really play 1NT forcing and 2/1 game-force after an overcall? Indeed, after an opening bid and one of Richard's sound overcalls, you are very unlikely to have a hand for a game-force.

Even if true, I don't see playing your normal system as an advantage. As Richard states, this requires playing very sound overcalls, presumably, the equivalent of an opening bid. I can't believe that it's a winning strategy to let opponents have a free ride. How often does a light overcall mess up opponents' auction, direct the best lead, enable partner to preempt, or lead to a winning save?

Since I don't see a significant advantage to new suit forcing, I guess I'll stick to my old style.
21 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hearts could be a far better contract. Give partner: xxx, KQxxx, A, xxxx. It's true that this is somewhat unlikely, but I think I should have tried to get to hearts. Yikes! I seem to have pulled out the 2 card when I meant 2. I guess I'll just bid 4 before things get even more confused.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True, opener might have almost all of his strength in the majors: AQ, AKQxx, xxx, xxx. I doubt whether anyone would call this “good for diamonds,” although some might object to the 1NT opening. Next question: If responder is 5=3=4=1, does a raise to 4 suggest a contract?
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the “standard” meaning is less than 3 spades, heart values, and concern about clubs. It is true that it's hard to construct a hand with these criteria that isn't also good for diamonds (depending how good is required), but I don't think good for diamonds is the main message.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know at least one very good player (multiple Spingold/Vanderbilt wins) who plays 2NT directly over a weak NT as natural, showing about 19-21. His theory is that a X showing 15+ is too broad, making any subsequent bidding very difficult. I do not know whether he plays this over 10-12 as well as 12-14 or whether it applies in pass out seat. Regardless, I don't think his 2NT would be comparable to 1NT.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is 3 a misprint?
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
QT9xxx, K, Ax, QT9x is a strong 2 bid?
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What? No comeback for eight-tracks?
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some require significant extra values to bid 2 rather than rebid a six-card major. Almost nobody bids 2 with AQT rather than rebidding a six-card major.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Me too
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would also like to see an article explaining the bidding structure with 1 of a suit by advancer forcing. It seems to require either super-sound overcalls or some sort of artificial negative by the overcaller.
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North is part of the world , and it looks like he or she doesn't play it that way. See also David Carlisle's post several lines below. Reading between the lines, it doesn't seem like he plays it this way. Yes, I play it as a cue bid, but I have no idea what I'd bid with AKxxxx, void, AKxxxx, x.
Nov. 17
Buddy Hanby edited this comment Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Isn't far northern California also sometimes considered PNW?
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I assume that this was not an established partnership. N 100% for a poor and ambiguous 4 when 3 was available. S 100% for rushing into Blackwood after N's ambiguous bid.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As one who too often votes for the wimpy action, I'm surprised to see a strong majority of wimps.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I checked both boxes. The traditional treatment is forcing, and I would certainly assume forcing in the absence of agreement. I would expect, however, that most expert partnership now play 2 artificial and 2 non-forcing. I'm unsure whether some play Reverse Flannery after a 1 opening or how that effects 2 or 2.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3, wishing for the days when this was only -700.
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It looks like I'm in a tiny minority, but I don't think this cue bid can be a game force. 2 did not promise a 5-card suit. E needs a way to show a raise but warn that she only has 3-card support. I notice that the majority has not offered a theory as to what type of hand 3 shows.
Nov. 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 86 87 88 89
.

Bottom Home Top