Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Doron Harpaz
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I said I was interested in the overall scientific conclusion based on simulation.
A list of advantages and disadvantages is not good enough as it has to be combined with probabilities.
March 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i would like to suggest another option how to distinguish between 2M and 3M bid by responder. Both show 3 cards support.

3M - show at least one honor in M , bidding proceed from here as usual
(i.e. show: very bad hand /non serious slam try/serious slam try) ,
strength of responder can be any thing but he is better than direct 4M bid

2M - deny any honor in M strength of responder can be any thing
Opener equipped with that knowledge about trump quality of his partner continue the bidding as he wishes. That include the bid 3M. 3M show he is still interested to play in M and his partner will respond in the same style as described before.

The idea is first lets make sure if we have reasonable trump suit or not. If we have bad trump suit - NT should be considered.
If we have reasonable trumps we can explore slam if we are strong enough.
With the information he got opener is in position to decide how to continue the bidding and to which contract he should target
Same is true for responder who can sign off in 4M or explore slam possibilities by bidding 3M
Feb. 3
Doron Harpaz edited this comment Feb. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thx, i have no access to hiss article
if you can send me a copy of the article it will be great
Feb. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I see that i made a mistake in the definition of how i play it , 3M by responder just show hand with 3 card support stronger than 4M, it can have regular values or extra values ( it does not show non serious slam try as i wrote) after the 3M bid i expect opener to define his strength or show control with extra
Feb. 2
Doron Harpaz edited this comment Feb. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i publish another,similar, poll in which opener has 1354 distribution
pls vote in both polls
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No honors in majors is part of the assumptions
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i read BWS again and again and it looks to me that you are correct in the way you understood BWS approach to this subject. I was wrong.
Jan. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
this is a question for those who vote for support dbl .
it looks that most of players vote for support dbl .
would you vote for support dbl also if you do not play walsh ?
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
as i wrote we play walsh so in case the bidder has opening hand he is going to bid his own Major (the other one) by himself any how. That is what he intended to do even before the overcall or the dbl
Jan. 13
Doron Harpaz edited this comment Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Larry Cohen has an article on the subject here
https://www.larryco.com/bridge-learning-center/detail/480
Dec. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My personal conclusion of the subject is as follows:
Spiral Scan is better than specific kings inquiry.
When bidding space is large enough so that it enable to show each one of the 3 side kings โ€“ use specific kings inquiry or spiral scan as you prefer.
When bidding space is too small so that responder to inquiry can not show any king he might have โ€“ reply to kings inquiry with quantity.
The captain of the hand and responder can easily know if the response is for quantity or not.
One can construct specific examples that show that while bidding space is not big enough to show any king, if you do not reply with quantity you will not be in grand . However if you reply with quantity โ€“ you will bid grand slam.
One can construct specific examples where even while bidding space was not large enough - playing specific king is just what you need , and not like i decided to play.
You make your choice
Nov. 30, 2016
Doron Harpaz edited this comment Nov. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So far no one refers to my question: if bidding space is not big enough to show all kings is not it smarter to play Kings quantity and not specific kings ?
Nov. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just learned “Spiral Scan”.
To my opinion Spiral scan does not solve the problem of bidding space completely.
The problem remain the number of steps between the responder's reply to KCB and 6 in trump suit.
Example :
Suppose trump suit is and the response to 4NT(KCB) is 5
5 asks for Q of trump
5 asks for K in
5NT ask for K in (not sure NT can be used)

How can you ask for K bellow6 ?
Nov. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
if you have the Q in trump and need 2 specific kings to bid 7 if you play “specific kings” you can check if partner have them and bid accordingly.
Can you do it in spiral scan ?
Nov. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
please explain: “2Maj - GF , Natural reverse”

diamonds and Maj ?
Nov. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i see now that i made a mistake when my 1st option contain “are passable” . obviously it can not be passed as 3M is GF.
sorry for that. i understand that this is why so many voted none of above. may be i will add new option for that
Nov. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i will start with 2 and pass 2 or 2 response.
After 2 response i will bid 2 without 4 cards in and pass with 4 cards in
May 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are correct , i have made that correction.
But the auctions as defined A. and B. were never updated.
May 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The auctions A. and B. as defined above never changed
May 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In both auctions I gave in the pole, one player express the fact that he has solid or almost solid suit. I would define his suit as a suit with one loser at most opposite a void in partner hand. This player is not looking for fit . He presents his great suit while checking if slam is possible. His partner should cooperate by limiting his strength and show controls.
May 5, 2016
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top