Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Kevin Rosenberg
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
while N's bid could work, you're really trying to get a bottom. You might, on a bad day, go down too many, but also you have no idea if they're making. Crazy sacrifices at favorable are, imo, just not recommended.

S's bid is also pretty weird, especially considering they could wait to balance. I put 50:50 blame, but I think N has more to learn here than S
April 13, 2019
Kevin Rosenberg edited this comment April 13, 2019
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If double shows a doubleton spade, then east shouldn't double. This would involve having the agreement to play 2n takeout. Absent that agreement, I don't see what e can do but double, and in that case, w should really not leave it in
April 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If decanter is world class, then we surely aren't cashing clubs when wed have such a huge guess at t2 if they ducked. I think declared has something like aqxx axx xx q9xx. I think either major suit should be fine, but a spade felt more intuitive to me. If I play a heart, I may have to guess my pitch on the third heart, which could be a little annoying
April 3, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm having them ruff and underruff now, so I don't see why that case is different.

Btw, I reread the poll and realized I was supposed to answer as a defender, not a director. As a defender, I would not call the director in any of these cases, even though as a director, I would give the defense a trick in the second case.
March 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think there is a HUGE difference betweeen these two cases.

In the first case, declarer is probably in a perfectly normal frame of mind. Most of the time, there is no reason why their claim would be wrong, and thus there is no reason to think they could ever do something so unusual as leading the 10 of clubs, or dropping it under the A or K.

In the second case, declarer is clearly having an aberration. One possibility as John says is they might think they are on lead. I don't think this, though, and despite this I still feel they should lose a trick because they are clearly in such a muddled state of mind, they might do something very strange in order to follow up with their plan of taking a club finesse, such as, yes, ruffing in both hands.

After all, they'd hardly want to discard the QC if they're intent on taking a club finesse, and they might well ruff in the dummy to get the entry to taking the club finesse. This is a good example of the kind of muddled logic that could result in them ruffing in both hands.

In response to what Josh said about the defense probably playing a club without the claim, I don't really see that as relevant, since they did claim, and I can play anything I want now as West. If you feel a bit sleazy taking the trick as West, especially because you were about to play a club, fine, but objectively, I do still feel that declarer ought to lose this trick, even if you don't want it.
March 15, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
but to answer your question Norman, it is standard to play that a single-jump in this case is a very strong bid, but is not forcing. In order to force absolutely, you must double, then cuebid, then bid a new suit.
March 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
fair enough, I guess I was answering based on my current notes (which don't have such a section), rather than standard (which, as I'm often told by certain people, I have “gaps” in)
March 8, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It would be nice if 3H showed this hand, but I obviously can't bid it without agreement that it's not some 5-6 (maybe reverse than rebid would be some 5-6 of different strength…).

3D is slightly under, but normal enough, and it does at least give partner a 3M bid. 2S makes some sense as well, and for all I know, could be a better bid
March 8, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would say forcing is standard only on the basis that it's forcing without the double and I like the general agreement that unless we specifically know otherwise, doubles don't change our agreements.

In practice, I don't think it matters much whether it's forcing or not.
March 8, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also you'll be hard pressed to pick up the heart suit ending in the dummy with the lead currently in your hand. After your suggested first two tricks, it is actually pretty difficult to even succeed. Better is to not block the spades, at trick 1, but if you do, to take a diamond finesse at t2 with your entry.
March 8, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not so improbable that ypure off 2 keycards, given partners failure to cuebid.
March 3, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don't I win the ace and claim the rest? Assuming rho followed to first club
March 3, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I disagree that 5s is ridiculous, or even necessarily wrong. E has a void, so E bid
Feb. 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i dont know peg, it's been pretty chilly hear in Berkeley - I'm sure it's comparable :)
Feb. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think we tied with you for third. Any idea what happens now? :)
Feb. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought about it some more, and I think you might be right that its better to go for option 1. Still, I am not defending 6D under any circumstances though.
Feb. 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think there are two main approaches here (assuming partner will have 6 spades - if partner often only has 5 spades then I might think differently).

1. bid 4S and try to defend 5D
2. bid 4S and keep bidding spades up until 6S

I think 6S is unlikely to go for more than 800 and may go for 500. Of course, we don't really know if they can make slam, but it seems fairly likely.

I prefer option 2 because 6S doesn't seem like it will go for much more than game anyway. Even if I chose option 1, I would always sac. I am just never defending 6D on this hand.

I would actually bid 4D to start, since I think this increases my chances of buying it in 5S. Since my plan is never to defend, it doesn't matter if I trick partner.
Feb. 16, 2019
Kevin Rosenberg edited this comment Feb. 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
the 1st and 2nd hands are possible, but I really haven't seen 11 cards very often in practice.
Feb. 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How is b3 close? Couldn't the doubles just have a 17 or 18 point hand with 3 card support. Over 2d, 2h is nf, no? And surely advanced will bid 2h with 5 hearts and 0 - 3 points or so
Feb. 15, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you switch the 5 and 6 of clubs so declarer couldn't unblock them, then I believe E is not irrelevant. If E could keep a third spade, then a spade to the king would not work because W could return a spade setting up a trick for E. If E could keep a third diamond then a diamond to hand wouldn't work either because then E will get the lead in clubs and push a third diamond through while W still has the AS.

Only declarer's ability to unblock clubs means that they don't actually need E to be squeezed.
Feb. 14, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top