Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for David Hankins

David Hankins
David Hankins
  • 5
    Following
  • 2
    Followers
  • 17
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
Nov. 1, 2017
Last Seen
July 18
Member Type
bridge player

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
None
Standard Modern Precision
Copy to my cards View/Print
David Hankins's bidding problem: 8xx xx AQ9xx AKQ
Just wait for the next installment where you lack the S8!
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
In the spirit of Master Solvers... the hand given is your own - pard's hand remains a mystery; one assumes that pard has made the best bid possible under the stated agreements, and it's up to you to respond. Other commenters are also puzzled as to what 5S might ...
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
Fair enough. Lack of spade strength/spots and values in diamonds are definitely drawbacks.
David Hankins's bidding problem: K86 95 AK976 A85
Interesting responses... Although 2D is much more destructive than X (and thus has a lot going for it in terms of making it much more difficult for the opponents to land in the correct contract - plus lead directing value in the unlikely event that pard is on lead), even at ...
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
Good point.
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
Might pard be bidding extra cautiously given S's advertised distribution? Can't think of any other interpretation for this sequence... Diamond splinter seems very, very communicative. And once you sign off... what follow-on bid should partner make given strong general slam interest but with concern about foul distribution suggested ...
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
I think that RF's and JD's comments are spot on. Although you might reasonably decide to bid 4S after pard's splinter, I don't follow your logic passing pard's 5S bid. Your 4S signoff indicates zero interest in slam in spite of holding a maximum with ...
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
4D was stated as showing shortness in the comments and was correctly interpreted as showing shortness at the table. Your suggested treatment of 4D is not part of our partnership agreement at present... Pard is a convention junky though :-), so we might (eventually) end up playing as you suggest in ...
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
Either 4D was the best bid by pard, or you should line up at the partnership desk. Or perhaps EW agreements on the meaning of 4D are not best as per JF's suggestion above - but that argument isn't relevant given the interpretation of 4D in the OP.
David Hankins's bidding problem: Kxxx Qx AQxxx KQ
I don't follow this logic... neither clubs nor hearts have been cue-bid. West must have both of them covered.
.

Bottom Home Top