You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My first strong belief is that bid 1NT with this hand is much better than the “classical” 2C. Of course you may play 2S in a 5/1 fit (1D-1S-1NT-2S), which is not necessary worse than 2C or 2D in a 4/3(1D-1S-2C-Pass or 2D), but it's sure that you'll never play 2D in a 4/2 fit (1D-1S-2C-2D) instead of 2H (1D-1S-1NT-2H).

My second point is just to say that, after the 4th suit (which I admit with this hand, because 2D is not enough and 3D is GF, geneally with unbal hand):
* 3H shows 1354 with Axx in H and not minimum hand,
* 2NT may be 1444 or 1354 or 2254, responder is supposed to say 3H now if he has 4 cards in his 4th suit.
I'm playing this way for long time, and it works without problem.
Sept. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The different comments suggest four things :
* the first one has no reason to be treated, and concerned the “not established partnership”. I agree that it's a problem at the table, but here it shouldn't.
* the second is the technical situation. In our french bridge today, 3D is GF and shows 5-5 (or more), this is very clear. It's then clear that 3H is either natural or values, that 3S is nothing in H,maybe something in C, that 3NT is something in H and C, that 4C 4D 4H are showing D support and that 4S is a weak weak hand with 3S.
* the third one is,HERE, to try to understand what the hesitation suggests : with some experience, probably something in C,very light in H and the fear to bid 3S to express this, or maybe an intermediate hand with D support and the fear to miss 3NT without being technically able to play 4NT. This happens very very often.
* then the fourth one, what should I do, AT TE TABLE? If 3NT comes fast, I've the choice to Pass (it's certainly a decent contract, cf. Bob Hamman) or to bid 4C, showing the 5-5-3 (on which 4NT will be to play). If 3NT comes slowly, I believe that I MUST punish my partner and Pass without thinking of anything else. And we'll then have a technical and ethical interesting discussion after the tourney!!
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some of you will be surprised, but nobody among the voters chose the bid produced at the table by our opponents. Would the panel be in default of imagination??!!
Sept. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Patrick, 4h are clearly denied by opéner. 3H are really possible for two reasons : we dont bid 3H with 3 small, and 3H is à positive bid. Which means that with 3 small cards and/or minimum hand we start with 2s and support h later.
Aug. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I dont think that Pass would be forcing. 6D is probably a “terrorist” bid, but sometimes terrorists have enough to win 6D!!
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner who has between 18 and 22 is supposed to say Pass on a free bid of 3S?? I think I've never found such a Partner!!!!
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Richard.. I'll wait for some other comments, but I think that you'll agree with me that, if you bid 3S (and I like the principle), you'll certainly play 4S. Because weak 2 on the left, preemptive support on the right, your Partner has certainly a strong hand, kind of 18-22 and he'll not Pass 3S.
Then, maybe, Pass followed by 3S on the new Dbl could make sense, except if you believe that you're very often in situation to win 4S…
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that Dbl now shows a good hand. If they bid Clubs I dont know if I'll Pass or Dbl, if they bid D I'll bid 3S (and partner will know that I've only 3, because with 4 I'd have bid 3S immediately, or even 3H with 4S and good hand).
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I dont understand why I'm now in such a difficult situation!! Wasn't it simpler to bid 1H-3H if this is my limit raise (or any other bid showing a limit raise if ot this one)? Ok, I've bid 2H, why not.. but why dont I bid 3H on the Dbl, in order to say to partner that I've 4H?? Did I dream that N passes on the Dbl??!! Now it's impossible to decide correctly: I dont Dbl, I may Pass or bid 4H, probably I bid 4H that I shouldnt win.. but if, because of some miracle, I make 4H, it's always fun to thank opponents to have been so active and pushed us to the game!!
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that 2S may be not GF after opponents have bid 2D, but it remains a 10-12 hand (under 10, Dbl).
Then 3D is a very simple bid, which is just saying : dear partner, I dont have 3S, I dont have 6H, I dont have 4C, I dont have D stopper to bid 2NT, and that's all. Of course I agree that 3C has some interest, just because it allows to make a difference ad decide that we dont say 3D with xxx and that 3D promises “something” and asks for some help (in D and in points).
But it must be clear that we dont create a GF situation with 3D, and the case is different from Opener 1S, 2D, Partner 2H : in this case, it's certainly better to keep 2S 5th or 6th, and then 3D GF.
July 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree.. BUT when we have a S support, we never say 2H with a bad suit: of course not always AKQ!!!
The point, in order to suggest 7NT, is to find either JH (5S, 5H, AK D, AC) or AQJx of D: maybe is it technically impossible, when Partner is not allowed to bid 1S - 2H - 3D with AJxxx x AQJx xxx or AJxxx xx AQJx xx.
July 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My purpose was to check if someone has a technical solution. Based on what you say, maybe is 7D more useful than 7H, in order that Partner understands that I've the K of D and not a singleton, and if he sees AQJ in his hand, he counts tricks. OK thanks.
July 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner has 100% denied K of C, but has said he's not subminimum. Then we know he has AJxxx in S and A in D. And we must complete with : a sixth S? the J of H? The Q of D? The Q and the J of D? the Q of Clubs? The Q and the J of Clubs? It's clear that, depending of his real cards, 7S will be 100% or quite (AJxxx x ADxx xxx) or bad but never ridiculous (Axxxx xx Axxx Dx). At the opposite 7NT may be totally ridiculous or full lay down.
My question is not really : what do you decide? but how do you check if partner has the good cards?
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2S doesnt deny 6S, but doesnt promise them. In the french standard, I bid 2S everytime when :
* I've six S,
* I've only 5S but cant bid 2NT (no extras, or a real problem in C or D), cant bid 3C or 3D which would show extras, cant support H.
Maybe it's not perfect, but we live with this from a long time!!
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I play that Dbl is penalty (old fashioned,maybe, but when I've something like xx KJ9x AKxx Axx, which happens quite often, even againsy very serious opponents), I definitely consider that my partner has no weak2 in H and then 3S seems more useful and more efficient than 3C. If he has 22-23, I'll have to decide on 3NT..
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that some people have decided to play first round cuebids before second round cuebids. I'm convinced that it's a bad choice, but everyone is free!! Let me just say that, for us, 4D denies King of Clubs.

And I agree with you, I was a little bit too fast with my example, such a subminimum hand makes 13 tricks on Club lead only with H 3-3. Then let's play 7NT for the same 13 tricks!!
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard, I dont know the reasons of Lynn's comment.

Let me just say that what I described is our system (quite common in France), that I'm interested by other options if there are.

And in order to be complete and to “support” Lynn's comment, I'd say that 17-18 with D singleton generally means for us small singleton, in order to say to Partner “strength is quite precise, I dont have 6S, I dont have any 5-5, I dont have a good second suit, and I dont help you with D. Then, even if we have a lot of points, maybe we dont have a lot of tricks”
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hey guys… the only King Partner could have is King of Clubs as you have the three other ones. And he denied the King of Clubs when he bid 4D.

Then, in order to play 7NT instead of 7S, we need to find in partners either 6 Spades and J of Hearts, or 6 Spades and AQ of Diamonds (and we reach 13 tricks), or if he has only 5S, JH AND AQ in D, or no JH but AQJ in D (let's forget the options of a 3-3 break in H or of a Club finesse if he has QJ or any squeeze).

And then, assuming that 7S is quite cold with any minimum hand Partner has described (AJxxx, xx, Axx, xxx, only 9 points is quite enough!), how do you check that you can move safely to 7NT ?
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're not right Nejdu, there are a lot of countries where it's impossible to connect residency and tax residency, and it's really difficult to know where people are and when. This is the reason why I suggest, either to strengthen the rules, or to open them, but not to stay in this middle way whre suspicions of fraud will be permanent.
July 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, please, make an effort and go further (I promise, I dont comment about WBF!!). As I repeat it, my only purpose is to try to stop using rules which had sense 50 years ago, and which today are impossible to apply seriously. Then, either by-country is by-country, and that's all, and perfect for me. Or we decide to open the doors, with some reasonable limits : 2 or 3 countries, some years after a change. With this, we stop all the fraud temptations.

And then? Do you think that we'll suddenky have 50 teams of mercenaries? I dont believe. First because not all the players may accept to play for another country (I know some who refused to play for Monaco at the beginnig of the project). Then because not all countries may acept teams of mercenaries (and for example, the NBOs which are recognized by their NOC cant do it). And as not all the sponsors may accept to support the new NBO as Pierre did it with Monaco, I'm quite convinced that it would not really change the landscape.
June 30
.

Bottom Home Top