Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Eric Kehr
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 16 17 18 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the 2 bid is only forcing to 3, then pass over 3 can't be forcing.

Obviously, the minimum strength of the 2 bid is tied to the minimum strength of the 2 overcall; but just because your overcalls are sound, doesn't change the logic of the auction.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does anyone know why Jack wasn't taking part this year?
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It can’t possibly be fair to try to punish people at the previous table, as you can never prove they did anything wrong. And if they did nothing wrong, they have no way of proving that either.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It’s probably possible to construct 3 other hands to go with the OP’s hand so the only winning lead is the 2, as the 4 is needed to protect partner from a squeeze. But with 32 there would have been no defense.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The majority bid so far is 3.

Is this showing the Ace, just a general forcing noise, or something else?

And what will partners responses mean?
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My guess: They'd gone past 3NT, and thought that 5 would score badly, so guessed to bid slam. However 3NT was going 2 down as the defense could set up their suit before the A was knocked out.
Oct. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only one off wouldn’t be a gross mis-statement of values. If you start going 2 or 3 off on this auction, though …
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is this what Ottlik and Kelsey called a Knockout squeeze?
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's a multi-purpose bid which shows no clear way forward. So, in principle, <3, <4, no good stop, probably <6.

It's not asking for a stop per se, but partner can certainly show one in response! He can also show a 5th , 3 card support, or deny all of these.

Hopefully then responder will know what do to.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The easiest way to get to 7 is if West has a way of asking about 3rd round control after bidding RKCB.

Then almost any start will do.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's a very nice article, Matthew.

Ian, I'm not saying these players don't play slowly as well. It's just that most of the time they could afford to play as slow as they do and still finish on time if it weren't for all the other stuff they waste time on.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my experience, the cause of “slow play” at club level is not really slow play - it's time-wasting of other sorts.

eg filling in the opposition pair number etc on your score card before looking at, and sorting your cards; writing down the contract on your score card instead of thinking what to lead; demanding to examine all the previous results on the board even though you know you are running late; asking partner at the end of the hand what he held, even though you've just seen all his cards; and so on and so on.

Ignoring all that extraneous faff, the bridge hands themselves are nearly always finished in time.
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is true that no method is perfect, but cherry-picking hands is no way to show how good a method is. You need to show the gains ouitweigh loses.

I haven't done the maths, but I think xxx Kxxxx is more likely than Kxx xxxxx.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Suppose the first hand were Axxx xxx x Kxxxx, then game isn't nearly as good, but you get there anyway.

Interestingly, if you make the second hand Axxx xxx Kxxxx x, then game is not great, but at least you have a play for it.
Oct. 8
Eric Kehr edited this comment Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know the exact details of the system.

If South is near promising 4 card support and an outside singleton, then North is just about worth a try.

If South could bid the same way with, say, Q replaced by 2, then 2 is an underbid.

2 is probably an underbid in any case, so I went with “Mostly South”
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or two losers in and none in (after discarding them all on )
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's also the line I came up with - which makes it even more likely that you're missing something.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
GIB hasn’t entered for years.

Although I’m not saying it would win if it did enter.

Wbridge5 is free, and normally does very well in these events, so that might be a good choice for them if they wanted to switch.
Oct. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even getting to slam on 30 points and two reasonably balanced is good going.

Finding 7 with any confidence when it is right would require a relay system I think.

I don’t see what South could have done any differently.

So what blame there is must go to North. And since it is unlikely that a discard on the 5th would be the difference between the slam making and not, he should probably have chosen something else.
Oct. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't quite get the Hamman quote:

If the top 52 pairs in the world played MP pairs tournament, who are the “drunks” getting knocked out?

Conversely, if two good teams play a round robin IMPS tournament with 8 weak teams, then the winner will generally be decided by which of the strong teams can “knock out the most drunks”.
Oct. 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 16 17 18 19
.

Bottom Home Top