Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Phillip Martin
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suspect 6 would make from my side.
Aug. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A diamond to the queen and a club through is needed to beat it two tricks, not to beat it. (Actually, I suspect I would go for the two trick set, even at IMPs, if partner plays the nine as some have suggested, since I would know that declarer's remaining diamond “must” be the ten.)
Aug. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To think this way is to adopt the same mindset that caused East to err at trick two. In signaling, as well as in choosing a line of defense, one must consider the entire hand, not just one suit. “Positive attitude” need not promise an honor in the suit led. It should simply say, “All things considered, continuing this suit looks better to me than does shifting.”

And, by the way, I would never play the nine whatever I thought my signal meant. Signals should be as loud as possible. Any high signal should deny the higher touching card.
Aug. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The 10 is correct. If partner needs to play you for the queen of diamonds, the contract was making anyway.
Aug. 28, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why would anyone think that demonstrating virtually 100% of Bridge Winners disagrees with his partner's action would sway him? Personally, whenever I find myself the lone voice in a poll is precisely when I'm most confident my answer is right.
Aug. 28, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An easy, practical approach is to play that anything up to 2 is to play and anything above 2 means the same thing as it would have after a non-competitive raise.
Aug. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Take-out for what? If East has clubs, he bids clubs. If he has four hearts, then they have an eight-card spade fit. You don't need take-out doubles when you already know what strain to play in.
Aug. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I remember having these arguments with Karen. “Yes, I understand the kibitzers five tables away knew attitude made no sense. But I wasn't so sure about the janitor.”
Aug. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the appeal in abandoning attitude signals just because it can't be actively productive to continue the suit led. Sometimes you want to encourage partner to continue because you know a passive defense is called for. Most of the time, if you want a shift, partner can work out what to shift to by himself. If your signalling method requires you to suggest one shift or the other, you have no way to suggest a passive defense.

On the occasions where you want partner to shift to the non-obvious suit, you can often use an alarm clock signal. Or, sometimes, simply encouraging will accomplish that. If he knows you don't want the obvious shift, the non-obvious shift may offer better chances than defending passively.
Aug. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Other. An offshape strong NT.
Aug. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1NT was not my first choice of opening bids. But, having done that, I might as well try 2 now.
Aug. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't “see” hands at all, since I'm not a visual person. I can't, for example, visualize a chess board. I need to be staring at one to analyze a position. I'm not sure how to describe how I retain bridge hands in my RAM (so to speak). When you do an arithmetic problem in your head, for example, do you see the numbers on paper or on a blackboard? Perhaps visual thinkers do. But I just remember the numbers as numbers. Similarly, I just remember the bridge hands as bridge hands, not as any kind of visual image.

I would say the big step I made in developing this skill was when I read Clyde E. Love's Bridge Squeezes Complete as a beginner. I followed his suggestion of actually dealing out the cards and playing through the hands one trick at a time to see how it all worked out. As silly as it sounds, I think that made a difference. Physically handling all four hands as I played through the squeezes gave the “visualization” process a physical aspect that then made it easier to internalize.
Aug. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I trust both. Nothing partner has done is inconsistent with his having four spades. A double of 1 would have been a 3-suit take-out. True, with 4-3-1-5, he could have bid 1S over 1H to show four spades with primary clubs. But if his hand is more defensive than offensive, he might have judged it was better to stay out of the auction on what sounded at the time like a misfit.
Aug. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner must have four spades. There is no way to distribute six spades between the opponents based on their bidding.
Aug. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
None, but I would phrase the reason differently. This hand is below the minimum for a pass when non-vul.
Aug. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. Restricted choice doesn't assume the opponents play 50-50 from equals. All it assumes is that we don't know what they would play from equals.
Aug. 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Counting initial cases as Kit does eliminates the necessity of worrying about what your opponent would play with various holdings. Remember that “restricted choice” is nothing more than a way of explaining a blind spot people often have in these situations. It's not a reliable tool for analyzing a position, because it can get confusing if the position is complicated. Counting initial cases and choosing the play that caters to the greatest number of them is the more reliable approach.
Aug. 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A trump is unlikely to be the right lead. Assuming declarer can't have four spades and partner can't have five, dummy is marked with a doubleton. So declarer has only one ruff available, and you probably can't stop it.
Aug. 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It sounds as if dummy is 2-4-3-4 and partner is 4-4-1-4 or 4-3-1-5. My first thought was to pass. I suspect that's best double dummy, but I probably have to guess the right suit to lead to beat it, namely whichever round suit I need to lead through dummy twice. And even if I guess right, partner may have a problem at trick one or two. If I lead low, he may play me for an honor in the suit. If I lead high, he may play me for a doubleton. Rather than hope we get all that right, I'll chicken out and bid 3.
Aug. 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If this is a Jeopardy-style multiple choice problem, I need to see the answer before I can choose the proper question.
Aug. 16, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top