Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Csaba Czimer
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mind you, he was a world champion at 19. Perhaps a bit more than winning the Spingold.
Aug. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Declarer would (should?) have covered with Txx in hand. Am I wrong?
Aug. 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hm… 20 years ago it was a sure penalty double situation. Partner has bid NT over the overcaller, we can't have major.
These days it looks like that penalty double does not exist anymore.
July 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Christopher: In short: yes :-)

More detailed: we respond 1 with a red shortness and 1 with a black one. Thus later bidding is (almost) completely symmetric with and , the only exception is 5-5 majors.

http://www.csabi.nhely.hu/system/index.htm">Even more detailed
July 20, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment July 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play this way on strong club:
1: 8-12, 4+ Or BAL
1: 8-12, 4+ , not BAL
If opener relays:
2: exactly 4-card major, unbalanced (4441s included)
2…: 5+ major, exactly the same way as after our 1M opening and 2 GFR
July 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Right. We play relay precision. I just tried to express that (how to say it PC) this method may not be optimal.
July 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I played this method holding this North hand I might have sorted a small spade into the “hearts” :-) Or perhaps a diamond, being red.
The same thing as not splintering with stiff ace.
July 15, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment July 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No big deal, just enter “Ekren convention” into google, if you have not heard about that.
http://www.google.hu/search?q=ekren+convention
July 13, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Richard:
Near guess, I admit he can easily have that. But how should he bid AQJTx, AKQJTxxx, –, – ? (or a slightly weaker spade holding)
He knows that you don't have the spade king. You know that he can ruff a spade and throw 3 of them on your AK + A.

@Buddy, Paul:
He bid neither 1-6, nor 1-1-2-6, so there was some degree of graduality. Actually he knows quite a lot about your hand.
July 2, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment July 2, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's 68% * (35,5% + 48,4% * 3/4) = 49%
See below for other calculations
June 28, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I entered the board into GIB. It played like this:
high diamond (spade from dummy), a diamond ruffed high, SpK, SpA, Sp ruffed high. It needed either 3-3 spades or club king onside (and 3-3 or 4-2 trumps) = 57%.
My play above (run the 10 etc) is about 63% plus the chance that they don't lead trumps when in with the J.
Kit's version ( finesse) is slightly better, about 64%.
David's play is cca 49%.
June 28, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Run the club 10. If they don't lead a trump then I'll have 2 spade, 2 diamonds, a club and 7 trump tricks on crossruff. I need 3-2 clubs, 5-4 or 6-3 diamonds and 4-2 or 3-3 spades for this, trumps does not matter. (~ 51% chance).

If they do lead a trump then ruff a diamond, draw trumps, and play on clubs, it depends on hearts and clubs. I'll have 2 spades, 2 diamonds, 5 trumps, thus I need only 3 club tricks, not losing 2 of them meanwile.
June 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My rule for unclear situations: if our bidding can be based purely on distribution then pass is not forcing. I think this is the case here.
June 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play it Good-bad: weak, but distributional hand willing to compete on level 3 (6+ after 1 opening, 6+ or 5-5 after 1 opening or perhaps GF) and normally denies 3-card . Playing this way direct 3-level suit bids show some extra but can be passed (invitational, cca 15-17)

Some people play the inverse variation, where a direct suit bid is weak and 2N contains the invitational (cca 15-17) ones.
June 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I liked the idea at first sight, but there is a problem: 3N will be declared from the wrong side.
June 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just needs a little further extension (to hearts and spades), and you get what I prefer :)
June 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I was a student we travelled to a large competition without having a team and asked the organizer to find us teammates. They did. They found 2 gentlemen, the younger was 83, the elder one was 92. Overall they had about average score, but in each (8 boards) match they brought a +800 or a +500.
June 24, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment June 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I prefer 2-way game (or slam) tries, i.e.
- step 1 shows a side suit (if responder is interested),
- step 2-4 are short suits,
- 3 is preepmptive.
- 3N is an offer
- jump shift is slam try with void

Short or long (if both are possible)?
- short with 6331, 5530, 5431, 6430, 5440 etc, that is you have 3+ cards in the remaining suits
- long with 5422, 6421, 5521 etc, that is you have less than 3 in the other 2 suits
- with 5332 choose a 3-card suit as a long one.

Responder can evaluate her honours precisely knowing this.
Of course it's not obligatory to relay on step 1, only if that knowledge helps more to responder than for the opponents.
June 18, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment June 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(I don't play meckwell light, but IMO…)
Opener should have bid 4 splinter on 2N if he decided to go past 3N. Then responder can sign off in 5 (or in 4N playing MP) or ask RKC and then sign off in 5.

As a bonus, here is my radical view:
Noone is smart enough for control (cue) bidding, it is an outdated thing which is simply too complicated for human beings. And it helps more for the opponents. Combined with last train it is even worse.
The only exception is when they bid, in this case I am interested in controlling their suit too.
June 14, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment June 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East can (and should) double 2
June 10, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top