Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christopher Monsour
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know I might miss a slam, but given partner's wide range I don't have five-level safety.
Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't believe there is a form of scoring called “any”. I pass at rubber. If you want to know what I do at other forms of scoring, post them. They are separate problems.
Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To quote Mr. Churchill: “In the morning, I shall be sober…”
Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is too risky if you're not a favorite to make, unless you think the field isn't bidding 5.
Jan. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't imagine either of these agreements (3 being non-forcing or 2 absolutely promising a fifth diamond). 3 can be limit or better, even constructive or better, as long as you can't play 3–the bid does promise support after all.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 limit-raise or better and 3 fit-showing both come to mind! I don't think the hand it quite up to par for a 3 splinter.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
xxx in RHO's suit and partner's being a passed hand (and our being vulnerable) are not things I am imagining…They are facts.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True, except that returning excess monies to shareholders avoids on-going agency risk (and, in some tax regimes, on-going double taxation).
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It depends on what you know about this pickup partner's proclivities. Some might take 4 as forcing. (I agree that they shouldn't, if their 3 was not forcing, but possibly they think it was.)
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner is a passed hand, and we don't want him passing a double.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Subtract several points for three small in RHO's suit and then notice that partner is a passed hand. You can double if they bid hearts and raise them to 2, but otherwise stay out of this one.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not having raised diamonds earlier is a bit confusing. After all, you likely have at least a nine-card fit. Partner will raise 1NT to 3 on hands where you should be in 6. The advantage of a weak NT is to find these slams that the field will miss…

If in this particular conundrum, there should be no disadvntage in asking doubler's partner what he thinks the double means. (To avoid giving away information, you should of course also ask this when no answer would frighten you.) If he says that it asks for some specific lead other than a club, obviously you should pass.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But often one person's junk is that same person's treasure…
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you're playing a system where responder can't show his primary diamond support immediately, change your system. If he could have, but did not, then he misbid. Either way, this problem is a self-inflicted wound.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How is calling all the other posters' contributions “baloney” going to incent them to reread yours more sympathetically, may I ask?
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, that is sometimes a motivating factor. I'd hesitate to say “usually”. If that's the primary motivation for a stock repurchase, it can cause some trouble. (But this is one reason why restricted shares are a better method of executive comp than options are.)
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michal, you really better have some other stated reason for your share repurchase besides trying to avoid tax on dividends. The IRS will not take kindly to attempts to evade taxes.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michal, I think what you are missing is that most companies aren't portfolio managers or conglomerates. There may be plenty of opportunities to grow at the present rate, but if those are outside of their skill-set, they should give the capital back to the shareholders to reinvest in those opportunities on their own.
Jan. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's too bad you don't know how to handle voids in Minorwood, since that's likely to be partner's next bid!
Jan. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, most corporate stock buybacks occur because the entity is overcapitalized. This does not tend to be strongly correlated with whether the shares are under- or over-valued, for obvious reasons.
Jan. 25, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top