Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Collins Williams
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Here is a link to the associated lead problem. As declarer I was certainly taken in. And making 4 did not matchpoint well. My impression right now is that once the dummy has rebid the diamonds the risk of the diamond lead goes down significantly.

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/lead-problem-663/
April 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Here is a link to the associated play problem. I was quite impressed by the 6 lead. I felt quite boxed in the the (imagined) ruff threat. Making 4 did not match point well. Well done West

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/what-is-your-plan-2/
April 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Opps are an relatively strong established partnership who also play weak NT.
West in particular has a style that varies between agressive and hyper-agressive
April 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My guess as to dummy's shape is 3-4-4-2 or 3-4-5-1 (some would have raised with that).

What do I do about that? Try to get partner a ruff? Seems likely to be too slow? Forcing dummy in clubs seems like it has some chance of protecting my trump holding. I voted for A
Feb. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Jay! I was beginning to feel as if I were completely alone (as opposed to just 901% so). With only 5 HCP I thought leading my shortest non-club suit made sense. The BW community at large seems not to agree :-(
Nov. 11, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why are the doublers so sure that X will be understood as forward going/responsive? I'd be very sad to double and have it end the auction.
Nov. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I answered 2-3. I assumed this meant as a partnership not 2 or 3 for each partner…

I also should add that form of scoring makes a difference. At MP doubles of part scores are much more common than at IMPS.
Sept. 22, 2014
Collins Williams edited this comment Sept. 22, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aren't there 28 balanced shapes (12 5332 12 4432 and 4 4333)? When I was making my relay system that is what I thought I had to encode.

For the record mine is
show suit lengths in suit rank order with steps being equal to 3452. Taking advantage of zooming allows you to show all of these after
1 1
1N

Below 3N and usually get a range ask in as well.

e.g.

… 2
2 2N
3 3D

Shows 4=4=3=2

Sept. 17, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm surprised at how few passers there are. Isn't this one of those situations where (since they have not been doubled into game), that the IMP expectations skew towards passing?
July 16, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ahhh.. I see that this is one of them new-fangled definitions of “invitational” :-)
May 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm curious as to what you think you gain by this. If 2 is (all invitational hands + signoff in ), then when responder continues with 2 hasn't he showed an invitational hand with 5 and then opener can proceed to show a fit then?
May 1, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“You basically need to play double the same way from both sides of the table.”

Several people have expressed this and I find it surprising and even counter-intuitive. The partners have differing information with respect to each others shapes and strengths. Why should their doubles have the same meaning?

My agreements have always been that doubles by partner of a limited, balanced hand are penalty and doubles by the limited balanced hand are take out (so effectively 2-card).

Jan. 16, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It boils down to whether or not you believe pass is an LA.
If so, you must pass if not, then you must choose between what you do believe to be your LAs one which is not suggested. I can't tell that 4S or X is suggested one over the other and I don't think pass is an LA. I double.
Oct. 10, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So perhaps this was a silly question. But there is another thread out there right now about the fact that people do lead away from aces against suit contracts. When they do so, what are their lead agreements?
Sept. 29, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for this series of articles! I try to go over every one carefully. Your explanation of the lead seems not to cover one holding…

What do you lead from AQT9x or AQT9? These seem not to follow the rule that “the second highest of the interior sequence will always be the third-highest card”. It may be that I do not understand what you mean by interior sequence.

Thanks Again
Sept. 28, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
some like it technical
Sept. 24, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok OK… I admit to the underbidding. (I'm a little curious about the 1 camp but I'll learn about that separately)

I'm really trying to get to the issue of the relative widths of the ranges of weak jump overcalls vs. simple overcalls.
What is really “expert standard” in this respect? To what extent does it matter that partner is passed vs. unpassed?
Is it very different when the over calling suit is s as opposed to a major?

A wide range for WJO would seem to make them very hard to advance over…

Thanks

Collins
Aug. 21, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Yuan- This gets to the crux of the matter. Partner thought that the 2 rebid showed a full opener w/6 . His reasoning is that any hand less than a full opener (and holding 6) would start with 2 so the inference from this sequence is “6 better than not a full opener”.

Perhaps 2N was right by W the last time around but 1N let me discover this little crevice…
Aug. 21, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why does pass end the auction? Partner will be getting another call. If I pass, doesn't that show a lack of clear direction and a lack of GF values?
July 30, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems as if there is no N/S agreement (or perhaps N forgot). If N forgot then E/W did get misinformation.
If there is no agreement, there is not much one can do.

I would be tempted at the table to ask S what the agreement was about 3S. Such a question might get more information out in the open about the general state of the auction.
July 15, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top