Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jonathan Ferguson
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't really understand the (unsolicited?) “comment to LHO that partner has a GOOD hand.”

As you say on the last page, playing diamond to Ace is clear. If I didn't do that the first time, I would play for the drop, as I doubt E is 4-1-1-7 or 5-1-1-6 on this auction.
Aug. 23, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The older I get the more I think that integrity is a mental illness that very few of us are infected with.

Great article, Debbie.
Aug. 23, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess it depends what you mean by ‘blame’. I would not fault E if I were W or vice versa, but if the question is ‘which pass is closest to a bid?’ I'd say W's first pass and I'd probably usually double there (recognizing that most people wouldn't.) And like Josh I consider it a clear double if all my stuff is outside their suit.
Aug. 23, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Funny, if anyone ever led the Q from Qx xx KJxxxx xxx against me (on a 1N-3N auction) and it worked, I'd be out looking for a recorder form after the set.

I'd love some more opinions (and maybe a simulation?) on that particular hand.

(Actually, a simulation will probably show it to be better than it is as declarer will always guess my Qx of when that's relevant.)
Aug. 22, 2012
Jonathan Ferguson edited this comment Aug. 22, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't feel strongly about this hand but, like nature, I abhor a vacuum, so here goes:

I don't like the 2 bid. I would expect a better hand. I wonder if a snapdragon double (showing with tolerance) would be any better. I think I'd pass and bid later.

I'm fine with 2 if you're sure partner will take it as a cuebid (whether or not it should be is another story, it probably shouldn't imo.) Bidding 2 is probably safer, though it takes up more room. Taking a shot at 3N (based on the inference that partner tended to deny tolerance by not doubling) would also have been reasonable since the opps hadn't confirmed a fit at that point.

I'd probably rebid 2 rather than 3 with the S hand at matchpoints.

I'm fine with the X by E since they're red and we're white.

W, having overbid already with no defense and only 2 pretty much has to pull I think. It's not clear to me that he should necessarily pull to 3, but it certainly worked this time.

I don't think the defense was egregious for non-experts. You did well to guess the .
Aug. 21, 2012
Jonathan Ferguson edited this comment Aug. 21, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And you're supposed to know all this before you see dummy? Unless you plan to read partner's tempo/mannerisms it would be foolish not to have such an agreement. Obviously there are times when you deliberately lead a dishonest card (such as when you want a ruff or when you know partner has nothing to contribute to the defense) but nothing about this hand suggests that this is one of those times.
Aug. 21, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As for the lead of the Q from QJ87, does the fact there was a stayman auction not tilt the odds against partner trying that? (Not really sure, just putting that out there.)

Also might be curious to see if any 9ers switch to Aers if dummy's were 5432.

Late edit:

Once we know dummy has a 4-card major, that lead from 87xx doesn't look all that ‘safe’ or ‘passive’ anymore, does it? If dummy promises a 4 card major and we're 4-4 in the majors and we decide to lead a major, doesn't it make sense to lead the stronger one?
Aug. 21, 2012
Jonathan Ferguson edited this comment Aug. 22, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bob, please tell me how you plan to take the first 5 tricks if declarer has QT and partner has AJ75
Aug. 21, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From what I've seen this week, a 30 second pause for thought would be considered by some to be ‘unusually fast play,’ not a hesitation. :)

But seriously, isn't taking 30 seconds at trick 1 pretty normal under the circumstances? I don't see much of an inference there.
Aug. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My first impulse (with 4x3) was to double, but the colors are terrible for defending and partner has suggested we bid on and I have an undisclosed fit and extras. I'll try 6 and hope he has something like:

KQxxxx xxx AKx x

I prefer the practical, semi-unilateral approach here as my methods are obviously not sophisticated and anything else might confuse partner and/or talk the opps out of diving in 7. I also don't particularly want to declare as it's not unlikely that RHO is void in .
Aug. 20, 2012
Jonathan Ferguson edited this comment Aug. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would play the 9, though I assume the A was right, else no forum thread. (I don't know the hand but maybe pard's whole hand is ajtx of .)
Aug. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the correct line on the first hand is to win the lead in dummy and play a . (If I do this early I can likely work out the position and that might well help me work out the position.)

The 2nd hand I chose to rebid 3, but I don't feel particularly strongly about it. I think it's right on strength and I'm hoping my 7th spade makes up for the ratty texture.

The 3rd hand 2 is terrible and I would have passed your hand as well. Without agreement I'd just cue. If 3 is some kind of mini-splinter (as opposed to, say, fit bid) I'd do that.
Aug. 20, 2012
Jonathan Ferguson edited this comment Aug. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm cheering for Sweden (they knocked out the slowest pair in the event (making it a lot more fun to watch,) that's gotta be worth something.)
Aug. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 is not a psych.

I completely reject any of the suggestions that S did anything objectionable before the hand was over (and that seems to be the main thrust of this thread.) There are many things in bridge that take time and experience to master, waiting for your turn to bid before bidding isn't one of them.

The gloating is the part I can't stand.
Aug. 20, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes I'm saying that my understanding is that it's illegal, and alerting it doesn't/wouldn't make it less illegal.

By “(technically?)” I mean that I've never heard of this rule being enforced (save, perhaps, at club games, to protect LOLs) and that I'm fairly confident that several top pairs use their own judgment to determine when to open 1N (irrespective of whether or not they happen to hold a singleton,) when playing in events that matter.

Forget what I think, though, here's ACBL: http://www.acbl.org/learn/noTrumpwithaSingleton.html

I think the key there is ‘You may use your bridge judgment to open or overcall a notrump with a singleton, provided that:

It is a rare occurrence (no more than 1% of the time)’

For those who favor opening off-shape NTs I strongly suspect that their 1N openers contain a singleton > 1% of the time.

I guess the argument could be made that if they play 100 hands, they open 1N with a singleton on average on fewer than 1 of those 100 hands, so they do it ‘no more than 1% of the time’.

tl;dr It's a stupid rule that is ignored. Better to have people alert or announce ‘frequent off-shape 15-17’ than to just ignore the rule.
Aug. 19, 2012
Jonathan Ferguson edited this comment Aug. 19, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like bidding 1N because if my pard rebids 2 I can bid my on the next round.
Aug. 19, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm just glad he didn't bid 5 because I was probably doubling that too.

I'll guess he has something like

AKQxxxxx x - AQJx
Aug. 19, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Last I heard, it's still (technically?) illegal in ACBL-land. Most asinine rule in the book afaic. (I'd be ok with no voids and could even live with no non-honor singletons, but ACBL should leave hand evaluation to its members.)
Aug. 19, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure 2nd seat vul makes 3N any more attractive. The more ‘textbook’ partner's 3 is, the more attractive 5 is. (I'd say textbook 3 is xx xx xx KQJTxxx, YMMV)

(I still probably would have bid 3N, but I abstained because I knew the result before I thought about the hand.)
Aug. 19, 2012
.

Bottom Home Top