All comments by Scott Needham
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like these combo fit-plus-RKCB bids. What response to 2N puts into the picture?

June 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess I would also, just as a slow down warning – understanding, I hope, that 5 is probably POC, 5 is probably extra D length, and others are cues? Of course, there is a continuum of “wasted values” layouts, and 4N here would create other problems. Some of these layouts would miss slam, many would not come close to making slam with this R hand – but would be cold opposite a normal expectation slam invite. Interesting deal.
June 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stu, what if O's hand is AK QJT9x Kx AKQx? S/he tries to stop at 5, but can't.

The problem with this hand is that there is no intelligent way to proceed unless O learns of the void and can push; I still think that R's hand is iffy for any unilateral decision to make a slam push – past 5, for instance – b/c O could be loaded in and b/c R is really not strong enough opposite many possible hands for O.
June 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Problem here is that if N is _inviting_ slam in this structure– and that seems to take a bit of inspiration–, how can S stop in game with a different hand?

In general, use 4 = H and 4 = S stiffs (4 = , 4 = one-suiters, O's 4N, 5 and 5 to play), 5 and 5 as corresponding voids. Now, relay = agree and relay + 1 = agree to commit to slam and 1430. For this hand: 2N-3/3N-5/5-5/6.

7 is a bit inspired, dontcha think? N is bidding like a guy with a concentrated, working 9+HCP (If my p'ship bid this way, I'd be expecting AQxxx in or better, and at least K.) S has to be able to divine that N holds only 2 cards (= 6-5 shape) or expect that N holds KQ in – without some extra tool, it's another “dirty guess” and it ain't happening. (Extension: N has to hold A for this bidding, so maybe S can use 5N after 5 to say “bid 7 with real extras.” H-m-m-m)
June 17, 2013
Scott Needham edited this comment June 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are N-S in forcing pass after 4?
June 16, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At our table, against very capable NQLOLs (“not quite”), it went an old-fashioned 1-1/1-1N/3N. I could've doubled for the lead, but….
June 9, 2013
Scott Needham edited this comment June 9, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Saw that and have seen others similar; also have seen descriptions that claim it does apply. And the column doesn't disambiguate NT ranges, which is really what I'm asking, unless by implication any jump in strain is 12+, probably limited somehow.
June 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ATT, it was b/c this was a 1st-time p'ship, no discussion, assumed as “slow shows.” But let me ask: assuming we play the Leb variation that says 3N is to play, how wide do we think this range should be? W here held Ax KT98xx AK AJx, which would result in 4S over 3N, but what happens if W is, say, x Kxxxx AKxx AQx and chooses to X? (Aside from the probability that we would then be discussing the merits of X vs. 3S by W.)
June 5, 2013
Scott Needham edited this comment June 5, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IIRC, Levin-Weinstein also.
June 4, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I
June 2, 2013
Scott Needham edited this comment June 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Isn't this just the inverse of Walsh's neg dbl treatment? I think John Swanson advocated this one in a D17 Forum fairly recently and thusly: “The treatment I prefer is gaining in popularity; one which reverses the meaning of 1S and double: a 1S bid denies four spades
and double shows four or more. Regardless of your partnership
agreement it is key to appreciate the two bidding difficulties present here. (1) Your high cards are in a short suit, a problem not unique to this deal. (2) Partner will expect some length in both minors for a takeout bid denying spades, not a single long minor.”
June 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael: What does – or what can – your 4M picture look like? would it include an unbid suit A ?
June 2, 2013
Scott Needham edited this comment June 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just FWIW on this side issue: I like the new suit call showing 5+ with 2 of 3 b/c I think a source of tricks message is valuable. After this hand I think I will now define it as 5+, 2 of 3, no other outside A or K, not 3 outside Qs. So it could look like 5-11 HCP, but it expresses a definite kind of hand feature: possible source of tricks. If playing 2C-2H as dbl neg, 2C-2D followed by R's 3D now has kind of an “excluded middle.” (Sometimes I think it would be valuable to have a dbl positive.)
June 2, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Warren Zevon: “We buy books because we believe we're buying the time to read them."
May 16, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hah! The thread motivated me to check yet again, and I now have a very good used copy for reasonable \$\$.
May 13, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another revised edition is needed: Quick search and I find “2 new from \$197.98 15 used from \$94.40.”
May 7, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Due respect to Mr. MacKinnon, but I think Kelsey & Glaubert's work is more succinct, more readable exposition.
May 7, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have to double down on How the Experts Win at Bridge. There is more pithily presented useful stuff – covering all phases of the game – in this book than any other I know.
May 7, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree about Rodwell; havae you considered Robson & Segal (available as pdf download)? I really want to get Woolsey's _Matchpoints_ – Mr. Woolsey, sir, can you get busy promoting a new edition? Currently, this book is mucho dinero.
May 7, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As said, Pass by S ‘risks’ playing 1H, but won't partner, with length, act in passout? I'd like to see (1H)-P-(2H)-P/(P)-X-(P)-2S/3H-X – no confusion about intent.
May 7, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top