Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Eric Kehr
1 2 3 4 ... 13 14 15 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On page 2, where it says “Best looks to be to take the invitational route with 2♣.”, should that read 1NT?
8 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In fact shouldn't the range of all non-1 openers be narrowed because any maximum opener (which has at least one Ace!) could have an Ace less and still be opened.
June 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The bidder has 5 good , 4 card support, and a hand not good enough to overcall on the first round.

Not much else justifies suddenly sticking your neck out at the 3 level.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Armstrong and Miller did excellent parodies of them in their comedy show (viewable on YouTube, search for “Brabbins and Fyffe”) so they must have felt that enough people would get the reference.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I open 1. Yes, we can sometimes get too high, but so what? We've made a bid which describes our hand if it happens to be our hand, but has stolen most of the 1 level if it happens to be their's.

That sounds like a bargain in my book.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I bid 5 but felt tempted to bid 6. Partner thought for ages and then corrected to 5 which RHO doubled.

Partner had something like Txx JT Jxxxx xxx and I made with an overtrick. Obviously I could have redoubled (although I don't think it would have got us any more MPs) but I didn't trust anybody's bids at the table, and wasn't at all sure whether they should have been sacrificing in (or even making) 6m.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So it shows you have a good hand, then?
June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The problem with this approach comes when it is not a misfit, or if opener has extras, then opener is forced to make some bid other than one of the get out options.

It's a similar issue to FSF. If you make it just a 1RF, opener has to jump on a lot of hands just because he has a little extra, and doesn't want to risk partner passing.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems to me that if you don't play it GF, you need some artificial way for opener to either a) show a dead minimum or b) confirm that we are GF, as there doesn't seem to be enough room for him to make just natural bids, and still explore for the best contract, and not get too high if both hands are minimum.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not at all. It is standard to say something like that when partner makes his contract. It's standard to say “NTP” (nice try partner) or something like that when he doesn't. No matter how badly he butchered the hand.

At the tables I normally play nobody notices if the defense or declarer play is terrible.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd heard that they said “thank you” when the dummy came down if it what was expected from the auction, and “Gracie” if it wasn't.

And one time declarer absent-mindedly said “Grazie ” and dummy exclaimed “Gracie. What do you mean Grazie”
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think he's ruffing the 4 with the 9
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When people say they hate Gerber they generally aren't talking about 1NT 4. They are talking about pairs who use 4 as Ace asking in almost every auction, and it's their only way to investigate a slam.

eg 1 2 (not GF) 2. Now responder looks at his hand, thinks there might be a slam in , or perhaps or NT and is forced, by system, to bid 4 asking for aces (as 2NT/3NT/3/3/4/4 are all non-forcing). Then they sign off, or bid 5 to ask for Kings. And then they sign off or bid slam.

I won't even go into what happens if the only slam (or worse, the only game) is in .
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What happens if partner psychs his reply to 4?
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It makes a lot of sense:

Since 1/1 are the easiest bids to overcall it's important to have them convey information to partner.

1, if it happens to be short, will either find partner with , or pre-empt opponent's, or make a overcall risky because you will likely have length there.

Opponents love to disturb your strong opening so it doesn't really matter if it is 1 or 1 - you will likely have to show your suit at the 2 level anyway.

Weak twos in the minors are harder to defend than weak twos in the majors because double is risky unless next hand has *both* majors.

With the hands that open 2, a standard system, if the deal is a part score, nearly always end up in 2 anyway, so obviously it is a big gain to bid it straight away.

The 2 bid looks the only weak part of the system - but sometimes you have to do this to make the rest of the system work. And since you would only need it on 4144 (and perhaps 5044) hands, it's not too big a sacrifice.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not really a convention (as it is, necessarily, without partnership agreement), but with random partners on BBO I tend to say WDP (i.e. well done partner) if the contract makes due to poor defense and/or despite poor declarer play; and WPP (i.e well played partner) if it was actually played well.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One benefit is that you can stay low on hands where you are not strong enough to bid it. eg after 1 1NT 2, partner isn't under any pressure to keep the auction alive in case you have a strong, but not GF, hand.
June 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My opinion is that a 10 second pause is way too long.

Reduce it to 5 and maybe people would be more inclined to follow the procedure.

And anyway, who ever thought for more than 5 seconds and came up with a better bid than they would have if they only thought for 5?
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Having explanations for all bids in, say, the first two rounds of the auction automatically announced, and doing away with these alerts altogether would be another solution.

Then they are forced to know what your bids mean whether or not they wish to take any action.

A side benefit is that your side is also forced to know what your bids mean :)
June 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand South's bidding at all.

Either the hand is a GF in which case he should start with his longest and best suit, or it isn't in which case he shouldn't jump to game.

And if, systemically, he has to show the major suit first, then he can at least try to find out if partner has 3 card support.
May 30
1 2 3 4 ... 13 14 15 16
.

Bottom Home Top