Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Frances Hinden
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 256 257 258 259
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have played 2M as an Acol 2
I have also played 2d as strong Flannery 14-17 45 M
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, it looks like a 1NT forcing bid to me.
Is the difficulty that your expectation for a 1NT forcing bid is not the same as theirs?
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can't agree to make the bid on very weak hands AND call it a psyche; by definition a psyche is not an agreement.

A “psychic control” is a bid that explictly caters for partner having psyched. For example, a 2 response saying “bid 2 if you psyched your 1 opening”.
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I admit I wouldn't be giving the play much thought, but even in a world where people lead 4th highest in dummy's first bid suit, the Jack wins when the opening lead is from exactly 4 specific holdings in the opening leader's hand KQ76, KQ765, KQ763 or KQ7653

There are 3 more holdings if you think they would lead low from KQ1065 or KQ1063 or KQ106

The ace gains when either player has Jx of clubs (12 holdings) or Jxx of clubs (30 holdings) or singleton J (2 holdings), or when someone unguards clubs anyway because they aren't sure if you are 4153 or 3154 (for example)

Doesn't seem close
Feb. 14
Frances Hinden edited this comment Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, unless you have withheld information; and this is an easy question.

Under the Open+ Chart, “Bidding Agreements are allowed unless they are specifically disallowed”

Under “disallowed” is only psychic controls and psyching an artificial response below 2NT.

As there is no indication that the 2 bid is a psyche, it is allowed. Easy.

If, in fact, their agreement is that 2 shows say 7+ HCP then it might be an illegal psyche. But you haven't actually told us how they described their agreement. You've told us it has the same meaning as a forcing 1NT. That doesn't say that it shows the same hand types of a forcing 1NT (although the actual hand also seems to be a normal forcing 1NT response anyway)
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe I'm missing something obvious (late night last night) but how do you make 13 in NT on a heart lead?
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 3 was non-forcing (as in standard Acol) it was obviously wrong

If 3 was forcing but could have been a minimum opening bid, then South needs to move over 3NT

If 3 showed extras, North was overly pessimistic. I sympathise with 3NT opposite what could have been a minimum
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
yes

Under ‘minimum length’ on the EBU card we write 5(4) for the 1M openings with a reference to note B which says

14-16 hands 5332 with 5 hearts always open 1NT; with 5S tend to open 1M but may open 1NT; 1M may be a good 4-card suit in 3rd seat. Min. (9-13 HCP) hands with 5M may open 1M or 2M in 3rd seat
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Kerry says, it's not about frequency but about partnership agreements and system.

Some systemic agreements are even less common than ‘occasional’ but if the bid is defined in the system with that meaning, that is an agreement and has to be legal according to the charts.

With xxx Q10x xxx xxxx the book bid in our system is to pass a 1 opening. When my partner held this hand he responded 1 showing 4+ hearts. Next time he might pass. If he always bids 1 on these hands, that becomes an agreement (legal in the EBU but irrelevant to the discussion) even if it only happens once every 5 years.
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You aren't competing with the pairs in 3NT, unless you manage to go more off in 2NT than they do in 3NT.

I also can't see any reason not to start with low to the 9 in clubs
If LHO plays low you pick up A10x, K10x, 10x, 10xx onside (7 holdings), and doesn't hurt against singleton non-10 offside (another 4 holdings)

Low to the jack only picks up AKx (2 holdings) onside and doesn't hurt against singleton 10.

That's a massive difference

Ignoring entries, low to the Jack also picks up Ax or Kx onside and AK doubleton offside (also 7 holdings) but doesn't work here, because they can just win and return a spade, win the next club and return a spade and you can't get at the clubs. They might not find this defence, but it's the normal ‘return partner’s suit' defence so it would hardly be surprising.
Feb. 14
Frances Hinden edited this comment Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't be so prescriptive on exactly what opener's hand is to bid 3NT. It is just ‘I think we might make 3NT opposite a hand that you thought was a sign-off’ If you restrict it to opener having AK of the suit you are being too restrictive.

This actually isn't so uncommon an auction.

We had an hand in Wuhan that was a flat board in 3NT making on a combined 20-count or so after the auction 1NT - P - (transfer to diamonds) - 3NT

Responder had K10xxxx and a 3622
Opener had something resembling Axx Kxx AJxx AJx - so it wasn't cold, but it was a playable contract. At our table the transfer to diamonds was 3C, which was doubled showing clubs, and the KQ were onside for the ninth trick. At the other table they led towards the king of hearts for the ninth trick (and there weren't 4 spade losers).

As responder, I am not sure it's necessarily right to transfer out on a 6322, but one reason I did was just in case opener bid 3NT!
Feb. 14
Frances Hinden edited this comment Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There’s a big difference between third and fourth seat. Rare in fourth, common in third
Feb. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, but you can double it for takeout and she can pass
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What David meant was win the first trick, take a club finesse and run 7 hearts coming down to

AQ
-
-
Jx

opposite

x
-
J
Ax

If South bares either king you cash 3 of the last 4 tricks
If he comes down to Kx in both blacks you can endplay him in either of them to give you the other.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As after other overcalls, pass then double is penalties so I am not sure how you let them off the hook, at least no more so than after other overcalls.

After 1 (3) natural, you have to pass with a penalty double and hope partner reopens

After 1 (2NT) you are much more likely to get another go at doubling them if that's what you want to do.

You may miss out on a balanced/defensive type hand when you make a negative double the first round then neither of you can make a take-out double the next round.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Vugraph commentator tells me

“I was commentating on BBO when this came up. I said ”there's a newspaper-column squeeze“ and left it at that. And I admit I checked with the GIB button first.”
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Added: by saying it's “too easy” I meant that when you see the full hand it's obvious that the answer is to run trumps.

Actually understanding the end position isn't easy and I used a DD solver to help me.

This hand was also written up in the (UK) Telegraph a day or so ago, as Tom also saw its beauty even faster.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think giving LHO AKx of clubs is consistent with the auction and opening lead.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think giving LHO AKx of clubs is consistent with the auction and opening lead.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Franco's hand is on the right lines.

I think there are a few layouts where something similar happens on the run of the trumps (I haven't worked out all of them yet). Whether these are more likely than the boring even red suit splits I am not sure, probably not given that we know spades are 5-4, we know the club honours are split. I was so caught up with looking for these end positions I missed the trivial possible line.

Perhaps I should have said it's a condition that every suit does not break as evenly as possible.

I think we need the 109 of clubs in hand (but that's a given) and there is some flexibility with the diamond and club breaks to increase the possible hands.
Feb. 10
Frances Hinden edited this comment Feb. 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 256 257 258 259
.

Bottom Home Top