Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Scott Needham
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was asking about responder?
May 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, here's a question for those who chose “Serious”: What kind of hand do you expect partner to hold for initiating Ser3N? I realize this is a broad question, but we can presumably eliminate a lot of source-of-tricks blockbusters and focus on some of the more mundane shapes?
May 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Still like the idea of 4 showing 5=2=4=2 with extras, not sure about the ‘no controls’ part of it.
May 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This partnership doesn't play any form of Neb2, but would use 2 with a big balanced hand, 3cd and extras, no Baronish sequence available for 16-17 flat. David, if it suits your analytics, the sequence could well have been 1-2/2-2/3-3, where 3 intitiates Ser3NT.
May 10, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment May 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree. And is it not likely that very soon you will be in answering mode after 1♠-2♣/2♥-3♠/4♣-4♦/4♥-4N? Won't a large percentage of even 17-18 count responding hands put us in a failing slam?
May 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's the little compass-looking thingie on the viewer's right of the row of icons above the composition block on the “create / poll” page.
May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wouldn't you also say “not only no extras, but rock bottom”? or would you?
May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good catch–fixed. Damn computer users.
May 9, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I hope we can pursue some discussion aimed at nailing down best practice in the Ser3N context. Phil Clayton's recent problem was instructive. So now I ask: Is this a slammish rock-bottom minimum?

Focusing on shape and controls is of course one aspect of these evaluations. What about high card strength in general? Are we always gonna be operating in “I know it when I see it mode” (not a bad thing) or can we flesh out some Stuff? Is Stuff superfluous, in the sense that Stuff is too constraining? A possible answer is: You worry too much.

What does a happy-to-hear-4, 16 count balanced (no splinter) responding hand do now? My answer is: Assume 5-level safety and use the Stuff you do have. Is this consensus?

If both now continue to cooperate – say 1-2/2-3/4-4/4, which is what I think most would construct – how “bad” does S have to be to try to eschew RKCB or whatever key-asking flavor one prefers? How good to continue?

Could Opener hold KJxxx x KQx Axxx? I'd say certainly: Is this consensus?

Could s/he hold KJxxx x KQx AQxx? I'd say no, this is a Ser3N call over 3: Is this consensus?
May 9, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMHO, one doesn't initiate Ser3N without extras. S should simply call 2 and let partner initiate. YMMV
May 9, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm bidding 3 with the N holding; guess I'm lucky to be backing partner into a corner. NB: Not fashionable, but I keep thinking there should be place in consensus 2/1 for 4 with hands like S's: Picture bid, 5-4-2-2, extras.
May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And then there's the time I had conflicting answers….
April 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
fjords? fnords, more likely….
April 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ATT, there is usually a kerfluffle when the bid was unintended, but chagrin at the director call when it was insufficient. “immediately realize your mistake” makes me strongly suspect the former, but nothing was said about “your” behavior.
April 17, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Repeating my comment on a similar thread: I seem to recall that in my first KS book, it was advised that AK, A in a 4432 was an opening bid, but A,K,A was not. For me, that's R22 at the most basic level.
April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Staunchly adhering to my R22 standards, I'm not opening. NB: I seem to recall that in my first KS book, it was advised that AK, A in a 4432 was an opening bid, but A,K,A was not.
April 17, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing Neb2 the way I prefer:

1-2
2 (denies 6, denies 4, denies 4+, denies 18-19 bal, denies ability to call 3, therefore either some 5-3-3-2 or 5, 4+)-2
3 (no extras, short, therefore Opener is 5=3=4=1 or 5=3=5=0)-3 (control)
3N (NotSer, denies control)- 4 (lots of info)

If South could call 3, then 4 would be a fit, and 4 would be real , but that's a different layout, now, isn't it….

EDIT: It occurs to me that responder might well call 4 over 3N – what TBW editors like to call a “delicate” bid – showing the fit. Opener might hold AQJx in , and someone might decide to play slam on spec for two 3-2 splits.
April 16, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment April 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I need a new obsession. I thought SARF might be a thing, something I NEEDED to know….
April 13, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bourke relay. Or, if playing Reverse Flannery Responses, Other Major Game Forcing.
April 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are all sorts of structures in which users assume the risk of missing a 4-4 major fit. WNT opposite a weak hand (SNTers open 1m), SNT opposite a weak hand (WNTers open 1m) to name the most obvious. Meh.
April 11, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top