Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Eric Kehr
1 2 3 4 ... 14 15 16 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Where I play, dummy is generally better off sleeping through the hand rather than watch the butchery taking place at the table.
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Slightly off-topic, but is there any good reason why standard procedure is for declarer to tell dummy what to play, rather than to physically play the cards from dummy?

Apart from issues such as arise in the OP, there is surely a huge amount of information leakage overhearable by neighbouring tables - especially when so many of the dummies are a little hard of hearing.
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wests bidding was fine. East failed to re-evaluate his hand as the auction progressed. He started with a minimum opening hand, but by the end he should be able to see that he could be providing 7 or more tricks for partner who has himself shown more than a minimum opener.
Aug. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surely the point of this law is that when partner pictures the set of hands you might have he would reach the same conclusion with or without knowledge of the withdrawn call. That clearly isn't the case here.
Aug. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If your non-psyche meaning of 2 includes some hands that aren't a non-psyche 1 opener, then I don't think it's comparable.
Aug. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Definitions are important here. I have a degree in mathematics and play a lot of bridge - but I'm not sure I'd categorise myself as a mathematician or a bridge player.
Aug. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What you *should* do is try to think about this problem in advance so that if it comes up, you already have your answer.

Once LHO passes your double, this (minimum response from partner, opener repeats their suit) is one of the most likely continuations, and it is the most likely of all those continuations which might give you a problem.
Aug. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Re law 15 - I think I was playing at that tournament.
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I pass. If I bid 5 and it happens to be a good contract, it won't help as we'll be playing in 6.
July 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why do some people have the attitude that they shouldn't explain any implicit agreements which are “just bridge”?
July 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The first two yes; the third one no.

The third one would be better if the J was with one of the queens, as it is possibly wasted in the long suit, But even then I'd probably want some good intermediates in the other Q high suit to think about an upgrade.
July 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is another reason I hate the alert system and would just prefer that the meanings of all bids are announced. Or at least all the bids early in the auction.

Then both opponents immediately know what all your bids mean without either of them having to risk giving UI, and can simply bid or pass with full knowledge.
July 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming (1) 2 is the majors, then this should certainly be the majors. It seems to me that you are more likely to have the majors on this sequence, as fourth hand doesn't have either of them.

Equally true if partner is not a passed hand..
July 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whatever constructive methods you use opposite a 15-17 NT should work opposite a 12-14 NT.

One big difference in auctions which begin with 1NT is that you are more likely to be outgunned by the opposition - sometimes heavily. You need to have firm agreements as to how to try to rescue yourself if that happens.

Another difference is that the opposition are more likely to compete on dodgy hands as they won't want to be pre-empted out of their possible game or part score. Again, you need clear agreements as to what bids are forcing, and when doubles are take out or penalty.

The other big difference is on balanced hands outside your 1NT range. Especially the 15/16 point hands. If you open 1m and the bidding gets competitive it can be difficult to show this type of hand especially if you play support doubles
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Imagine a very simplified version of bridge:
Dealer always has a 15-17 1NT opener, responder always has 10+ HCP. So each hand is effectively a choice of game or slam decision, and we have some hope of giving the computer a complete description of the humans' methods (and vice versa).

So really what we are testing is constructive bidding in one kind of scenario and “pure” play and defense.

Do we think that the best humans would be better than the best machines at this? Or does their superiority lie in the other areas of bridge (eg judgement in competitive auctions)?
July 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Looks like a double to me. I'll not bid again unless partner forces.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't say I object to the 2 opening, but I probably wouldn't have chosen it myself.

It's not easy to bid these hands, but it is generally the case that if both hands have long suits, it is better to have the weaker hand's suit as trumps.

So maybe North can just bid 4 on the third round. Or alternatively, South can bid 3NT on the 3rd round, and North take it back to 4.

If South had been dealer and had opened 2, I imagine they would have got to 4 rather than 4 or 3NT, so if North reads South for that sort of hand, maybe they should get there anyway.
June 29
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?
June 24
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
1 2 3 4 ... 14 15 16 17
.

Bottom Home Top