Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Hamish Brown
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 83 84 85 86
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The problem with the ACBL way of doing rules seems to be that it causes lots of conversations that are only relevant in the context the the acbl rule set create. The rest of the world open 1NT when they feel like like it and dont have to participate conversations about under what conditions it might be a psych.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The issue is that the ACBL has made a lot of dumb rules in the past when it comes to bidding system. No multi is another one. How do you sort that out? Well you got a lose lose situation i guess.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In other jurisdictions where a possible singleton is common place we just accecpt the transfer with a singleton and hope we survive. However when the transfer is into our non singleton suit we can bid our singleton as a conventional agreement.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
13-15 v weak NT
Weak but not mad vs strong NT

6+ suit. With a solid suit and 7 tricks i prefer penalty X if im on lead
Nov. 17
Hamish Brown edited this comment Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes MOSCA is the Italian that invented the system which was later refined and popularised by Fantunes. When they were caught cheating people change the name back to MOSCA.

I dont know how any of these players treated this 20-21 balanced hand though, this is what we do, it would not be too hard to create a sequence that located the fit but would require more complexity. I do think 2NT is an awful opening in standard.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes its interesting how good responders need to be to head towards slam. I think with a singleton and 10 its resonable to seek a suit slam and the position is ok for where the hand with 3 has the singleton.

However to be correct you need to pick the up for 1 loser. QTx gives more confidence that Q9x
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sry done
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Our bidding playing MOSCA with forcing 1 level bids:

Q95
K10975
4
AJ64

KJ84
AQ
AK6
K873

1 - 1
2NT - 3
3 - 4
4 - 4
5 - 6

1 is natural 2+ 9+ points forcing
1 is 4+ 0+ Points
2NT is 20-21 bal
3 is simple gameforcing check back

We play lowest option first so 3 would show 5, 3 = 3 and therefore 3 = 4234 or 4243

4/4/4 = fist or second cue bids 4 agreed
5 is turbo 3 key cards including a control in
Nov. 14
Hamish Brown edited this comment Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only one Meckwell at the bridge table. But im not sure they are singular when it cone to sleeping arrangements.
Nov. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This was my response also. With extra trump length show the Q.
Nov. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT is truly horrible. A X of 2 is resonable.

Like Richard i prefer 1 to X but imv this is a normal TO X.

ELC is more like 4441 or 4531, ie a hand that must convert bids to . The are generally 5 cards because if you play ELC then a 2 bid after the X and 2 from partner promises no extras. With this hand if partner bid i would not correct to even though that would be ELC in my partnership also.
Nov. 8
Hamish Brown edited this comment Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have played 2/1 as game forcing in a weak NT context for a number of years. It has quite a few advantages:

1NT response can be 100% forcing since when you open 1 suit you always have a second suit or a strong hand.

2NT rebid after 2/1 response is 15+ balanced.
2M rebid is always 6 since you either have a second suit or you have 6.

We play 1NT as including most 5422 shapes without a 5 card major 5332 with a major all 4441 hands. 12-15 except green v red where its 11-15. So 1NT is the catchall that makes the rest of the bidding more effective.

We pass balanced 11 except green v red.
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lawrence’s statement applies to psyching 1. When you have short 1 and long you can almost guarantee that if you overcall 1 partner will raise aggressively.

This sometimes works out quite well but only when are close to 1444 around the table.
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Brian we play a weak NT and open all 4441 hands in range 1NT. It means our 1 opening is 5 unless its 4=4=4=1 and 16+ We play a 2+ which is also 5 and unbalanced in the NT range.

The singleton in 1NT is not terrible quite often it produces narrow games and also misdefence. I cant remember a time when partner transfered and i had to play a 5-1 fit. Occasionally when this happens and partner has less than an invite the opps rescue us and now we can lead the singleton for an effective defence.

Your weak NT style is more normal and i can understand it. I would open the hand 1 playing 4 card majors if i was really against 1NT. The only rebid issue is opposite 2 from partner. If you play 2/1 as game forcing you could play a leap to 3NT as this hand.
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True. The problem then is the fact of holding 4 in the other major. If 2 was bid it is likley you would play 2
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A common treatment in my part of the world is that 2 shows a game try in . Is that bis is available then that is more comparable to this hand than 2 pass or correct which is automatic and could be very weak and cant be invitational in but may be invitational in
Nov. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play 2 as 13+ with 5+

But weak NT means that 1 is either unbalanced 9-14 with 5+ if weak or 16+ if balanced.

Also transfer responses to 1 so 1 is 0-12 without a major.

We played 2 as 6-9 with 6 cards for a few years but where unimpressed with the effectiveness of that in our structure. The main use of 2 as 13+ is that it limits the 1 response which has a high value given that 1 is forcing.
Nov. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We pass 12-13 balanced without a 5 card suit when red in 3rd and 4th. We only once missed a game when partner had a balanced 11. Mostly it produces a plus.
Nov. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The related question i have invested of energy in thinking about is: how many points is optimal to open if you are playing 3 robots and have equal or most hcp at the table?

Form of scoring as well as table position matters a lot.

At total points i tend to open only with a strong NT or better. If partners a passed hand then green is a pass with less than about 18 but red a 16-17 NT can work.

At imps green in first seat a 14-17 NT works well but pass-with balanced 13s. Red a strong NT is good to open and 13-14 good balanced points is ok to open 1m. The risk of passing out when you can play 1NT out ways the risk of partner bidding some hopeless game or competing too much.

The worst hands to open are semi balanced or balanced with a 5 card major because the robot has not been trained to think about the maths of opener having the best hand and so tends to over bid with a fit.

Sometimes the robot has passed with a massive have interms of shape and controls and you miss a cold game because you pass with 12 but that is out weighed by the cases inwhich you pass with 15 and the bots have a game they cant bid because you did not open for them.
I would be very interested if anyone has done the maths relates to the human having the best hand.
Nov. 5
Hamish Brown edited this comment Nov. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I lead a trump. Just to piss partner off
Nov. 5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 83 84 85 86
.

Bottom Home Top