Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Dima Nikolenkov
1 2 3 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The main advantage of putting 2 or 3 cards weak NT into accept is that one frees 1NT rebid to show 18-19, =(if playing strong NT). In uncontested bidding one easily sorts out 2 or 3 cards later (since opponents did not get in till then, they may well leave you alone for the rest of the auction. Pretty big gain in space on slamish hands.
March 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do people really want to win THIS way? Declarer tried to win the trick then stammered. If this is not a slip of the tongue, it is difficult to imagine what is. Maybe one should take away the rule about the “slips” completely but it is still there, in my opinion it is rather clear here.
Declarer would have done better by claiming at this point.
Feb. 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was North.
Feb. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, NS deserve procedural penalty(no question here) for not disclosing properly but what about the BRIDGE result? And was it misinformation?
Feb. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All doubles by West were neither alerted, no specifically explained. East's bid of 3 suggests that he took X of 2 for the “face value” = spades. Taking double of 2NT out would suggest a subminimum hand (fearing that opposite invitational values it might well make). I think Ulrich Voigt question is important: “Why West bids 3NT?”

Agree that NS deserve a procedural penalty.
Feb. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Roland
I played modified version of Danielson's Precision (see Henry Sun's comment) some 10 years ago. 1 response included 8-10 balanced hands. Still have a system file.
Oct. 12, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We also did the same way Pierre mentioned and when communication did not run smoothly we had a couple of laughs at the table when partner of opening leader (usually NS pair) was trying to remove the tray. Was all settled after board N3 at the latest (we played team event).
Sept. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Absolutely - still I remember kicking myself AFTER I have tried something stupid
July 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also got the J from Patrick Jourdain on the A play and tried to cash the King … So another respect is in order :-)
July 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi James
what I think people have in mind is something of this sort. Instead of giving general advice I go by examples - anyway it is for the most of us easiest way to learn.

Say bidding goes (2) - all Pass and you partner lead a spade spot that lets you guesstimate partner's (and declarer's) length (for the sake of simplicity say it is 3) so in your mind you produce a picture of this kind (2 “known slots” 2 unknown:
- - -
- - - - - -
??/???
??/?
As soon as you have the information about one minor (See first Nigel's comment) you complete this VERTICAL picture.
Other actions are useful
1NT - Stayman - response - Contract. (1.5 known slots)
1/ - 1NT - 2/ - they finish in a major (start with 2 5-4 slots, get the suit of the lead)

Concerning points - count yours and the moment dummy come down do the math (40 - mine - dummy - MINIMUM of declarer (see Eugene's comment)) - then you get ONE number for partner's strength.
Regards Dima
March 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Might be a tough problem to construct hands where all the suits are frozen.
Jan. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this is the crux of the matter. The statement was that IF the information about the choice of game only would be available THEN South might have passed. Well …
Nov. 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, everyone was bidding their hats off. West-East combination of invitational ;) bid AND choice of games call are, should we say, slightly aggressive.
Nov. 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think that 3 PROMISED 4 cards (North made a decision that “got” both West and South). The same way East-West combined to “get” South to think that there were looking for a slam. Notice that you trade a and a between West and North hand (what both East and South were bidding for) on a given layout 5 X would roll home. Now South got in the North's way.
Nov. 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just to get the record straight - Lotan was South and became declarer as a result of a relay response. I led K hoping to find a good shift, so it was Ron who jumped to 6.

From the same match if we are to discuss opening leads:
http://www.eurobridge.org/repository/competitions/14Opatija/microsite/Asp/BoardAcross.asp?qboard=021.16..1024
From 18 tables 15 played in 2/3/4, 14 from the East hand. Only at our table was the club lead found. My guess would be that East showed either spades only or spades and a minor. Most players lead a . Not all are world class but the european championship is a pretty reasonable field.
Dima
Aug. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi all I am a member of the swiss bridge team. My teammate (Rob Walker) has claimed that A lead at his table was made with a speed of light.

While we are on the topic of making 6 contract you might want to make your own opinion about this board:
http://www.eurobridge.org/repository/competitions/14Opatija/microsite/Asp/BoardAcross.asp?qboard=022.16..1024

The bidding went 1NT - (P) - 2 - (X=) - … thereafter the defensive side retired. The Staymaner(North) made 2 or 3 relays figuring that partner has no 4 card major and 5+. The bidding was at 3 after that. Then North jumped to 6 without checking for keycards.

South was furios at North at the appearance of the dummy.

What stayed with me that the next morning David Gold walked by when my NPC and me were drinking coffee and inquired about this particular board. I think David would confirm my recollections
Regards
Dima Nikolenkov
Aug. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner wanted to play 6NT only he'd bid it over 2NT. Now looking at AQx and having more powerful hand that I have shown I think 7NT is justified BIT or no BIT. I would choose options 2 and 3 from suggested.
June 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Europe many players use 2 as start of invitational sequences after 1m-1M-1NT (or equivalent if using transfers) and 2 is a GF as in your structure. Then DIRECT 4 level call is a singleton self splinter and 2(invitational) followed by 4 level call does 2 things:
1) Wakes partner up (what kind of invitation is THAT?)
2) Shows VOID self splinter (once partner got over the shock)

One can reasonably use Exclusion KC 4NT after 2 + Jump.
April 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very impressive!
Nov. 18, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok does depend on the level of competition - opening bids and responses were growing lighter and lighter over the years :-)
Nov. 11, 2013
1 2 3 4
.

Bottom Home Top