Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Marion Michielsen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it is a HUM (highly unusual method) if:

By partnership agreement an opening bid at the one level may be made
with values a king or more below average strength.

HUM method are only allowed at the knock out stage, and when you have send in your entire system in advance and announced that you are playing the HUM methods.
You also lose the seating rights for all matches.

http://www.worldbridge.org/Data/Sites/1/media/documents/official-documents/Policies/WBFSystemsPolicy.pdf
Sept. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think its not allowed under WBF rules to systematically open in 3rd seat (or any seat for that matter)n with less than 8 HCP.

If they do it all the time it becomes a part of the system. So the complaint (if true) makes sense. But the timing is rather strange.
Sept. 11, 2016
Marion Michielsen edited this comment Sept. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
should be easy to run a search through the BBO vugraph archives (with the right software)

But I agree that its verrry strange to come up with this right at game time.
Sept. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok thats fine, but not everyone would do that.
If this is your only invitational sequence with spades (the OP didnt say that), then 3 will probably not even promise a really good suit (and neither deny diamond support). 8 diamonds and a void in spades is rather extreme but there may be many more hands where it will be better to play 4 than 3.

Apart from that I dont see any reason why you would want to bid 4 as forcing here. Is that a choice of games? You can bid something else with that (4 maybe). If you are too strong for 4, bid 5. There cant be a slam anymore either so I don't see how it can be forcing.

This is a very different auction than for instance 1-3 as invitational (if you would play that. Make it 1-3 otherwise) when opener is unlimited.
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
well, your diamond suit is good enough to correct 3 to 4 so you cant have the 15 (16 I dont believe anyhow) HCP with too weak of a suit.

I guess you can even have - Kxx AJTxxxxx Qx.
Or do you want to jump to 3 the 2nd time with 10 hcp?
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dont see how this can be forcing.
West bid a non forcing 2 , then east bid a non forcing 3, and now 4 is forcing??
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How is it possible that a team is 100% to qualify, unless they are mathematically safe?
I would not be at all surprised if both Spain and Austria drop out in group C.

As Christina said, I think we should be able to discuss which teams we think we qualify etc without other teams feeling offended. I'm not at all saying that Austria or Spain is a bad team (impossible to do so well unless you have a good team), just that its all really close and both teams have a tough schedule left.
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes exactly, assuming it is penalty. Which I guess it is not for most pairs.
Of course double is penalty when you have AT97x of spades. Next time you have a balanced 10 count with no good support in clubs and you bid?
Points is much more common and usefull than pure penalty I would say. But pure take out also seems wrong, there is just no space for that at such a high level.
Sept. 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It doesnt really make sense to not bid diamonds on the 2 level the first time (assuming a weak 2 bid is available), and then when the opponents open a strong NT behind you and partner bids the majors, all of a sudden wanting to bid your suit at the 3 level.
If your suit isnt good enough the first time, it isnt good enough the second time either.
Aug. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like Orens suggestion. Also the difference between the 3crd and 4crd raise.

I play 1 as unbalanced , and we normally raise very light to the 3 level with 4crd support. This does get you too high sometimes, but quite often the opponents can make a 3 level contract in that case anyway.

Raising with both 3 and 4crd support up to 15 points to 2M is not really playable I think. And it doesnt even seem you can find out min/max and 3/4crd. How to judge how to bid on when partner can have 15 with 4crd, or 11 with 3crd support?

Gazilli after 1 -1NT is probably not as important, as you can reverse into a major, and when you have both minors you know you have a fit anyway.

For instance in your example hand one can bid 1-1NT-3-5-6
I also dont think it is obvious to bid again over 2, one can easily face Kxx KQxx AKQxx x (not so likely partner has clubs as a side suit when you have 32 in the majors) and then you just want to play 2.

We played for a while that 1-1M-2 was some kind of gazilli, but it was 18+ with any 54 (not 4M) , or diamonds. The 18+ because you didnt want partner to not bid 2 too often, and if he doesnt, it makes the followups easier.
It takes some pressure off the other new suits, not making them 100% forcing anymore, but means you have to bid again when you have 16-17.
I know this is supposed to be an upside of Gazilli, that you can get those 16-17 hands off your chest, but when partner makes a negative response and you decide to pass instead of bidding your distribution (and sounds much stronger than you are), you sometimes miss a big fit and play 2 instead of 4 or 5m.
July 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, I dont see the reasoning behind your statement
Gee, if they have a big two-suit fit, then the total tricks are off the chart. Bidding has to be right, despite my hand.

Are you talking about the hand David Yates posted?

I dont see any reason why they have a bid 2 suit fit. The 2C bid suggest clubs and only 3crd heart support (otherwise he probably would have supported hearts the first time). Opener has not rebid his hearts so he is likely to have only 5. And you have KJTx in their second fit. Partner has never bid anything else than 1S, even though you made a good raise. Its not possible he has 11 cards in spades/diamonds.

This hand sounds very much like a wild, gambling, double shot (and a poor one IMO; one that is very unlikely to win)
July 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Think it is rather easy to say that 5 is obviously exclusion with diamonds as trumps.
Sure, you wouldnt pass 2 with 4+ hearts, but you would with 7 diamonds?
And partner is supposed to work that out at the table? Of course.
July 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think these kind of messups are inherent to a double meaning 1C opening.
Maybe the 13-14 balanced makes psyching or wild preempts less likely ( I doubt it) but it surely makes it impossible to handle interference as south has no idea what North has.
July 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jonathan,
I find your lecture to Ida rather offensive. I think you make her sound like a spoiled little girl.
quote:

'When you publicly (& loudly) complain about trivial, minor inconveniences & annoyances in your life, while overlooking the countless blessings & advantages you seem to take for granted, (many of which are not enjoyed by the men you are targeting for criticism) & distract from the truly important issues of our time, when we are on the brink of a historic & catastrophical ‘point of no return,’ I feel uncomfortable, upset and sad.'

Can you please explain why Ida ‘seems to take her countless blessings for granted’ and why she doesnt care about ‘the truly important issues of our time’. Besides, I dont agree with any of your assumptions about her, but even if I would agree with them, I dont understand why they would matter anything in the discussion about sexism in bridge.


Maybe you can even start your next post by explaining how thankfull you are yourself for your blessings in life, and how much you do to help the world with the truly important issues of our time.


For what its worth, I think Ida is one of the nicest persons I know. She is always ready to help others and she has a smile and a nice word for everyone. Recently she won a special award at a junior event for her excellent behaviour at & away from the bridge table and she was voted to be a true role model.
June 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I too have, and still do, experienced a lot of sexism in the bridge world.

I remember when I was playing in the Dutch U20 team, we had a very good team and we're all really into bridge. Everyone assumed the guys would try for the open team later on and they liked to discuss who would make it and who wouldn't. Most people wouldn't even bother to include me in the discussion. Not because I was any worse than the others, but they would just assume I would play in the women's team for the rest of my life.

On the other hand I do think that I had other opportunities that the guys didn't have. I have always been rather assertive and already when I had just played for a few years some of the top players would play with me in the mixed. I could also make a living playing in the women or mixed events when I didn't/couldn't in the open.

Since a few years I have been living in Sweden and there I have always felt appreciated as a good bridge player, and not just as a good female bridge player. They are hoping for me to change countries and now their top players are assuming I will try for their open team and not for their women team. A big change in attitude compared to what I experienced 10 years ago and one that makes me very happy. I realize that I have become a much better/ better established bridge player in those 10 years, but just compared to my peer group I was probably equally good back then.

However, some doors will remain closed for me, because I'm a girl. Last year both one of the top sponsors and one of the top American pros told me they can't play bridge with me because “their marriage is more important”. Don't get me wrong, neither of them was even suggesting in the slightest way to do anything more together than to play bridge, but it would just “look bad for their wives”.
Just compare this to the business world. Would you turn down a good deal because your wife doesn't want you to negotiate to a woman?

Anyway, I can't really complain because I have had a lot of good opportunities as well, and especially have always had really good partners in mixed events. This has learnt me a lot, and I'm happy with where I am now.
June 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course you should have a (2) CC and show it when asked for it. That's not what I meant.

I have always learned that you cannot ask opponents about possible defenses to your bids before you decide to bid them.
I.e. You cannot ask them what defense they play to 1NT and then psych if the answer is Meckwell but do something different if the answer is penalty doubles.

I couldn't find any support for this in the rules other than law 20. But it makes sense to me that you can't ask questions about future bidding rounds (although I guess in practice 90% of the people will have no problems answering them)
June 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As said before I dont think this the right position to psych. 1st chair, but also with all white there is equally much to gain as to lose.
The problem with your shape is also that the hand might be devided badly for the opponents and they might go down in a slam on the trumps 4-1 (or worse) if you just let them bid it.

I dont think pulling 3x reveals the psych. Cant you have the same shape but a real opener? Or do you always sit with a real opening hand, even with a void in clubs?

Anyway I think its good that you tried to psych sometime. Most players (me included) almost never do it and I think we should try it more. Just pick a better position/hand to do it next time :-)
June 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually the opponents dont even have to answer the question about to what level they play negative doubles if you ask them.

Law 20.
F. Explanation of Calls
1. During the auction and before the final pass, any player may request,
but only at his own turn to call, an explanation of the opponents’ prior
auction. He is entitled to know about calls actually made, about relevant
alternative calls available that were not made, and about relevant
inferences from the choice of action where these are matters of partnership understanding.

You dont have to answer questions about possible calls in future rounds of bidding.
June 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Debbie, I also think the UI is a big issue. My experience is as well that it doesnt help to call the director against it, once you play multi, you're just dead.

I remember a hand where the opponents had agreed to play option 1, which included dbl as take out of spades and 2 as take out of hearts.
We opened multi. The next hand didnt read the defense and immediatly overcalled 2, which now obviously was natural. Her partner bid 2NT with a stiff heart and it continued 3-3NT. We called the director but the director ruled that ‘she could see from her own hand that it had to be natural’ also ‘we would surely have supported hearts if we had 10 or 11 hearts together’.
June 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play it as forcing but of course it depends on partnership agreement.
For me 3M-4M is a very good hand with both minors but of course you can also play this as a good hand M+m and 4m as non forcing.

While playing it as forcing I would still do it on a lot of weaker hands as well. Especially 3m-4m as both majors is a bid that I will make on a lot of hands that are good enough to bid. Partner is not supposed to go over 4M with marginal hands. Its more important to hit the right strain than to hit a perfect slam.
June 10, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top