Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Rao Zvorovski
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The term comes from Hughes, in general we tend to prefer to show suits as a first priority.
Nov. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, corrected.
March 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you. I did look through the laws which seemed relevant before posting, but this one seems to have slipped through.
March 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Double, if it's for takeout, which I prefer
Jan. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The link should be https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/517431
Dec. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also many smaller bridge jurisdictions (like mine, Estonia) use the WBF regulations. So thus in Estonia at tournaments without screens and in clubs doubles and redoubles are not alertable.
Dec. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you for the confirmation, me and my regular partner are trying to adopt this method, so knowing that I got the principle right helps.
Dec. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I understood that it would go
2N-3-3-3N-4, and responder would bid 3 holding 0-4.
Dec. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Precision, 2 isn't really a forward-going bid there,mostly just preemptive. Opener doesn't continue too often.
Nov. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1-1 {2+, 11-13 bal or 11-~21 with } : {{4+}}
2-3 {14-16 splinter} : {natural}
3-3 {cue} : {cue}
3N-4 {Serious} : {cue}
4-4N {A} : {RKCB}
5-5N {2 with HQ} : {Have all keys, king ask}
5-6 {CK} : {AK(can't count 13 in NT yet)}
7N-P

A long and somewhat roundabout auction, but gets us to the right spot. Somewhat new partnership, so 4 or 4 rebids are not in the armory and footing might not be too firm at all times.
Of course, opener could reevaluate to 17-19, but I don't think that would make the auction any easier.

Edit: Had explanations in square brackets, so they weren't showing up
Aug. 31, 2016
Rao Zvorovski edited this comment Sept. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course, that's just my interpretation of the facts as given. I just find it highly unlikely that they noticed to agree not to play ‘fourth suit forcing’ from a passed hand and then not discuss any further - I interpreted “undiscussed” to mean that they had not discussed this being an exception.
July 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The pair had clearly agreed to play that the fourth suit is artificial forcing for one round, and mainly used it to locate stops. I assume that they had neither discussed nor have any partnership experience about passed hands; thus they have no agreement saying otherwise(no defined exception to the rule). Therefore fourth suit being artificial and forcing IS their agreement and there is no misinformation.
July 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Apologies, we actually play 15-17 NT.
June 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Note that I actually found out the shape by 3C and could implement a relay there; I might even do so in a serious strong club partnership.
April 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After the 4 cue, opener would bid 4NT to show even number of KC and lack of or control.
April 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I ran a small simulation and found that of the hands that Binky points qualify to open according to my standards, 35% are in the range that I would not accept an invitation with. However I will concede that it was flawed in the aspect that I didn't filter for 1M openers, and didn't do any hand re-evaluation. I am lowering my estimation to 30%.
April 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We open all 11-counts and limit raise on about 11 counts, so it becomes a question of how many hands evaluate to the 11-13 range of the hands that evaluate to 11-21, which I believe to be around 40%.
April 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 Precision - 1 - 1NT - 2 art GF - 2 24xx - 2NT - 3 2434(/2425 possibly) - 4 agrees clubs, control - 4 control - 4 control - 4NT even number of KC-6
is one possible auction, tho I do admit the downside of having declarer's hand pretty much open.
April 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that after the 5C, any call will have be slow.
April 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not against opening 10-counts - I actually quite like to - for example, in a Precision structure with 10-12 NT. What I have doubts about is your structure.

Firstly, opening 1 takes exactly nothing from the opponents. You have said that opening 1NT is a gamble, yet non-vulnerable it is a gamble strongly in the opening side's favour, for we have taken up a whole level with a bid of pretty good definition. For constructive bidding, opening a mini-NT is no worse off than after your 1-1-1NT and we make it a lot tougher on opponents. I will admit that it becomes too risky for my taste when vulnerable and retreat the 10-12 NT opening to 1.

I also feel that 10-19 can still be sometimes hard to manage. 1-1 seems particularly vulnerable to preemption. In my own Aggro-Precision I limit the openings to 10-15, because for each point you add near 10, you need to remove more at the high end to keep the number of hands contained in the opening the same. Whilst adding hands to the strong club is also something I do not do lightly, I firmly believe that limiting the openings is a big benefit for my system.

I will admit that your 1D opening might enjoy some benefits over ours in competitive or slam bidding, for the latter I use an artificial relay and for the former I try and manage with negative doubles and an artificial 2NT. However, I do believe that a natural 1D can be a good idea.

In conclusion, whilst I do agree with some of your ideas - in particular, opening 10-counts and not inviting opposite a limited hand without a 9-card fit - I believe that the execution of your system is not particularly remarkable and lacking in some aspects.
April 4, 2016
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top