Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Miller
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Adam's choices with one exception. I play double is just an opening hand with 5+ diamonds. Far more likely to want to compete with that hand than with a weak NT.
Jan. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
None of the choices precisely captures my distinction between 2 and 3. The jump is definitely slammish, and asks for cuebids, but doesn't require more distributional information that you might get between 2 and 3. That doesn't mean 2 cannot be slammish, just that responder wants to hear what opener bids next before making that judgment.
Jan. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe to play, for two meta-reasons. 1) With the exception of Texas transfers and an immediate 4 splinter over a 1 opening (not overcall) each partner can bid 4M to play at their first opportunity, and 2) after an overcall, the only splinter is in opener's suit. For example, I would play 2 in this auction as constructive NF, 3 as “almost forcing,” and 4 as fit-showing.
Jan. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After 2/1 … don't do it.

After Jacoby it depends on the rest of your structure. We use 2N as limit+, and opener most often rebids 3 (artificial, accepting at least some game try) or 3M (terrible hand), leaving the rest as very specific hand types. In our case, 3N is a club void, but there is no reason a priori why that makes the most sense. Rather, it is just one artificial bid in the whole structure.
Jan. 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't agree. I prefer the OP sequence to show solid hearts.
Jan. 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Except for 6.
Jan. 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm sorry … it was certainly not my intention to pick on you, and I apologize that my post came across that way.
Jan. 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Damn! Missed being the first to report this. Too busy …

David is correct; the number cited in the OP is the one discovered two years ago. I wrote about it at the time here https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/m74207281/. That article had some comparisons to aid comprehending just how big these numbers are. The new one doesn't seem that much larger. However, you would have to multiply the old record holder by a 910,807-digit number to approximate the new one. A 910,807-digit number is immense in and of itself, just not quite in the same category as the new prime.
Jan. 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was thinking a low heart, giving South the choice of blowing a trump by clearing the spades, or not needing to ruff a diamond to hand until late, thus avoiding the uppercut.
Jan. 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Haven't worked out all the details, but a low club off of dummy at trick two may do the job.
Jan. 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, Deep Finesse says that Deep Finesse can make it. No claims about you.
Jan. 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted never, but I could be persuaded that 18-19 5332 with a small doubleton in responder's suit could make sense over a 2R response, if you also play that 4 on this auction shows three-card support for the major, allowing a slam try below game. Over a 2 response, there is so much room that I can't think of any hand that the specific description is worth eating up two levels of bidding. Moreover, we would have to use 4 as the equivalent major-suit raise, which doesn't allow a try if the auction started 1 - 2.
Jan. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More unusual with suit contracts. With NT, easy to construct a hand with a vulnerable stopper that would make many more tricks from one side than from the other.
Jan. 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And occasionally 2 is the right contract. It has happened to me.
Dec. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On your problem hand, I might have started with 2. If partner pulls to 2, you can now bid 2N naturally and get your hand across. Of course, you could catch a heart fit and a reasonable hand and miss game in hearts. The right approach may depend on your diamond holding, which you didn't give.
Dec. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hence my previous comment about loose language … of course the double stands, but I would not allow South to pass the double.
Dec. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To ML … I consider an instadouble a BIT every bit the equivalent of failing to wait after a skip bid, thus subject to adjustment for acting on UI. I suppose I was a little loose with the language; what I would require is for the contract to be 3 by South, or something more if justifies by North's hand.
Dec. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The corollary to my comment below that I would pull a slow double at the table and take my chances in committee is that I would come down hard on leaving an insta-double in. I can't speak to director actions, but if one polled me on this I would say as much and, to the extent committees still exist, vote to reverse such a double were I on the committee.
Dec. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The “clever” 3 is actually an agreement, and we use Mulberry to sort out the strain over the bid. I think it has come up once, and we just ended up playing 4 opposite a minimum GF with some wasted spade cards.
Dec. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I rebid 3 with that hand as a punt. I can't have weak 6=4 minors as I would have bid 2 with that. I will sort out the rare strong 6=4 minors the next round. The advantage of using this as the punt is that 3 can now show a partial stopper.
Dec. 21, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top