Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Yates
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 200 201 202 203
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some funny things one hears could have been said by one of the above. The one person who I seldom see erroneously attributed is Oscar Wilde. I think that is because there is a uniqueness to Wilde. A line like: "A man’s face is his autobiography. A woman’s face is her work of fiction.” is hard to misattribute.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The answer is -27, right?
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“The problem with quotes on the internet is that one never knows whether they are genuine.” - Abraham Lincoln
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps neither neither player knew it was OK to try to sign-off in game with a minimum hand. Nine bids after 2 and neither player could find a 4 bid.

Here is how LTTC works: North is either cuebidding diamonds, in which case South has the most minimum 3 bid ever and should just bid 4, or North is still interested in slam if South has extras. Which South still doesn't have. Or North might need a diamond control for slam. But he doesn't just need that one itty-bitty little thing, otherwise North would (a) have bid 5 or (b) continue over 4. A typical LTTC hand would look like:
Kx / AKxxx / Qx / Kxxx and you are still not making slam opposite the S hand. North needs to have more, if he has more, obviously he will continue.
July 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with the initial pass if you are my opponent.
1 is fine. How else are you going to get to the diamond slam if opener is x / Axxx / AKxxxx / Ax? Certainly not after 2. (You did not mention if you had an no option for fit jumps, but if you pass hands like this in first seat, you better not be playing FJs)
If 1 shows 5, I play double as a good hand over hearts. Because a good 4-card raise can now bid 3 and this hand can bid 3.
I have no idea why this should be a forcing pass situation. Since 5S-X is -500 against 450/480 and they make six clubs, perhaps you should consider that when neither hand has shown any strength, you are not in a FP situation at the 5-level.
It would never occur to me to hit 5H on this auction if partner passed.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bypassed six spades because they play Flannery??

“Here's your sign” - J. Foxworthy

In the future, other pairs will now be pre-alerted.
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am so old that I can remember when people psyched all the time, Roth-Stoners even had psychic controls and no one ever got their panties in a bunch when someone did something.

Ironically, back then psychs were just about all a player could invent because the ACBL would not let you play anything unless it was specifically approved and had a name.
July 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The TDs at our local clubs run web movements whenever possible. Much better for everyone to play the same boards instead of some subset of a larger total. Also, there are more comparisons per board.

Bridge players hate everything new and always grumble. But web movements are the way to go.
July 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner found a way to go down in 4 by losing two clubs. (Really.)

I did prefer her 1 opening. Though our our auction went 1-2-4 (ugh) but I would have accepted a GI. This type of hand will often play better in hearts 5/3 and is a poster child for why you want to play Gazzilli.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Small sample size, but the times we did open 1 on =3352 were all wins. I expected this might be a payoff for the unbal diamond, but so far we are 3 wins in 3 tries without even (surprisingly) a “did not matter”.

Knowing the diamond hand is unbalanced is a big plus for competitive auctions. That I can state definitively based on a very large sample size b/c I played a weird Precision variant. It put pressure on the 1NT opening - which stunk - but that does not happen in standard.

Another big win for the unbal diamond is transfer rebids. We played unbal could be 4/5 in the minors either way because I never really cared.

If you are worried about losing the club suit, give up Stayman :)
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If W was something like Qxxx AJ9x Qx Jxx he cannot just sit and wait until partner leads out of turn. Sometimes a lead is just the worst of all perceived evils.

I am with Danny (below) that the spade shift is not scary. Might even help. It would be much more disconcerting to see a small club come back than a spade. If the deuce of clubs hits the table, I want a trick 1 mulligan. If E plays back a spade and W continues, declarer should know whether they started 4-4 or 5-3. It really won't be hard.

Diamonds will likely behave. Given hearts 4-3 and no 5-bagger for W, perhaps 60% to bring the suit in. Much better than that if your expert opponents would balance white over 1NT with a stiff. Against some ops, W has to be 4414 for me to lose a diamond.

It seems reasonable to bet on having the timing and give yourself two chances to make a heart trick by playing low.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, the first option against Multi in ACBL Defensive Database (and it bears the question, how would they know this works if we can almost never play Multi?) is that double is TO of spades. 2 is a TO of hearts.

My only experience with this method was I think it was credited to A.R.F. in Anderson's & Sabine's book, “Preempts from A to Z”. I asked Andrew about it once and he told me that he did not like it :)

(Have no idea what they are currently using.)
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also do not like 2NT on basic principle (Jxx). I do not like 2 either. If diamonds is raised or opener rebids 2M you are well prepared. And the problem with 2 is if opener rebids 2. If you raise to 3, opener lacking a heart stop - which by your hand is likely - will be snookered If you start with 2, responder needs to rebid 2 and not raise diamonds. (“Sorry, I had a diamond in with my clubs”.) There are problems with all options. Pick your poison.

Even though 3NT is unlimited, why rebid 3? 3 is a violation of Hamman’s Rule. 4 is also a violation of Hamman’s Rule. Don’t be surprised when two violations on the same hand of TGBH’s Rule leads to a poor result.

Players need to accept the old idiom of “you made your bed, now lie in it”. North decided to open 1. It does not matter whether this is an “opening bid”, do not bid 3 because you suddenly got scared that your opening has only two and half tricks in NT without much future for providing another.

Responder now worries about his defective 2NT response in pulling 3NT. It is a little too late to guess that your first guess was wrong. But I see people chickening out all the time for no reason other than fear. What I seldom see are players finding a safe haven once they decide to second guess themselves. Most times, they are just leaving a reasonable spot for a poor one.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW:

Judging from some posts, apparently a lot of people do not play relays or they employ rules & treatments much differently than I do.

Our rule for a relay after strong club and positive is Ask has either tolerance (plus) for Show’s suit or is so massively strong that he can place the contract on just a pattern out and key cards. If opener had 0-1 spades on this auction, we nearly always elect to show our suits.

Therefore, in IMO based on our principles and experience, electing to start a relay with the opening hand is sound. Especially with Ax. The start options for us would be a bit different from the OP. 1-1 (4+ & 8+HCP); 1 (relay) - 1NT (5+ spades and “extras”). If opener wanted to show hearts rather than relay, his rebid would have been 2 over 1, showing 4+ hearts and a longer minor or 5+ hearts. Responder with the OP hand would show 3+ support with 2 and opener would now bid 2 showing 5+ and setting trumps. We call this an OSSHIT sequence. Turns out that Rodwell uses something similar (always 5+M) but he came up with an acronym of MAFIA. Our sequence is not the same - 4+M - but it needed an acronym so: Other Similar Shape Is Trumps. OSSHIT is an appropriate explanation for sequences when partner forgets.

Opener does have a random problem after the relay response of 2. Hearts is now STEP and a relay continuation. I have no idea what opener’s other options were at this point and whether opener can have six+ spades for 2 (6S/4m) but if the breaks are natural bids, it would be expensive to bid 3.

I think this is where some of the problem starts. Given that 2 shows significant extras, asking is probably not unreasonable, especially if breaks are defined as natural. I do find it odd that 3 is not defined. That bid is STEP over a relay response, so question: does the relay just end with 3? That seems odd or at least not best since Show has not patterned out.

I don’t think the problem is Kickback. It started before that. The final problem was Kickback Konfusion Kausing Kontusion and Kouch Knaps for a Kouple of Knights. But it seems to me that N/S started a relay auction (fine), continued the relay train (OK, but possibly problematic), got off the relay train (fine with that) but the players were not sure of the auction direction once that happened.

Usually, when we give up on a relay, we are often looking for the best strain as the priority. It seems to me that once N bids 3 without discussion, it is either the (infamous) advance cue, or potentially natural. With responder’s hand, I would have opted for 4 and not 4. For me, 4 is a good raise of hearts, and has to be 5350 on this auction. 4 would be no club stop. Perhaps a hand like Kxxxx / Qx / AQJxx / x. If the later is a 4 bid, then 4 has to be to play.

I think that rather than just looking at Kickback, the relay & breaks need to be tweaked. Even with our lower relay start, after 1-1; 1-1NT (2nd relay), we could have been in trouble with a second relay. If Show decided this was a good 2-suited hand, we would have lost the heart suit. 5530 hands can be troublesome when the fit is in responder’s 3rd suit.

Since I have no idea whether you have space to show 5530 or what your options over 2 where, I have no clear suggestion, other than take a second look. Our experience has been that relay breaks often need to accommodate “showing” the STEP bid, otherwise that suit can be lost. If I were constructing sequences here after what was given, 2 for me would not set trump, but look for hearts. If opener has 3+ spades, you can stay on the relay train, splinter or bid 3 non-serious. If you care about a minor, you can relay or bid 3m. If you have nothing unless partner is excited, rebid 2NT.

If you want or need 2 as natural(ish), then perhaps 3 needs to show hearts. MAFIA/OSSHIT transpositions to find a major are very effective at saving space. For ex: with Qxxxx / Qx / Kx / KQJx responder can show either tolerance (3) or a fit (4m/4H) without killing space. Using 3 to show clubs is fine. Opener did not relay, so he is telling partner he does not care about diamonds. If partner likes the clubs, your side can certainly afford to pass 3NT, given extras and no 2NT “do not care” bid.

Notice that 3=H saves an entire level of bidding. Meanwhile, 3=C-4 gives up nothing compared to 3-4. R/M Prec is different than your relay structure, but Rodwell's stuff has been known to work from time to time. This might be a useful principle to consider, especially in breaking a relay.
July 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pretty certain that it is conphuzion.
July 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I opted for “would have opened 1” because, playing Precision, this has been a 1 opener since the 1960s. Systemically, one does not have the option of a 1NT rebid since the 14 HCPs are out of range.

The 1-1; 2 always shows 5-4 either way in the minors. It is actually trickier opposite a non-PH because partner can have an invite, but opener can have a bad hand. If the hand was weaker, I think many Prec pairs might just rebid 1NT to take strain off the 1-1; 2 sequences. That is what we currently do and the rebid structure can get us to 2 when responder has the magical 5422 hand or even 44(32).

There is no big systemic hole in being forced to start 1-1; 2 on these hands; though in standard I would favor 1 given the suit disparity. Every system has payoff hands. Who cares?

Playing Precision I would pass as responder with:
Qxxx Kxxxx xx Qx and correct to 2 with Qxxx Kxxxx Qxx x and the 4-2 one system might put me in looks no sillier than the 5-1 another system is certain to produce.

Trying to construct methods to best bid 20-21 combined misfit points is a complete waste of time. Everyone will have a problem on some variation. The best one can do is get out quickly and cheaply.
July 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
980 is no longer the proper legal ruling in ACBLand, either. It would have been under the previous regs, but they changed the law. That was wrong and not understandable. At least not to me, as the offenders lost their claim to “equity” in my world.

So 995 it is! After all, how else can we produce such a score?
July 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for posting the whole hand. I was wondering what a WC player would need 2 minutes to consider. He (or she) was obviously composing a RKC Blackwood lesson for the student. Without RK, one might need to hesitate for a while so partner can go with good trumps.

(Certainly seems that opposite just one K, 7 is not a consideration, is it?)
July 1
David Yates edited this comment July 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once you become Pepsi, we claim you as our own.
July 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is such a “gimme” example of a L16B1 violation that, quite frankly, if you got this one wrong you just should not be making rulings.

Even the “BIT is not demonstrative” crowd has not shown up on this one, suggesting that North might have spent two-minutes thinking about whether to bid 6NT.

BTW, how hard is it really to figure out where one is going BEFORE bidding 4NT?
July 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 200 201 202 203
.

Bottom Home Top