Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Hendrik Sharples
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 67 68 69 70
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit, what do you gain by playing your methods instead of the impossible negative structure with GF 4x1 hands?
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have passed 1NT as responder. As declarer, I would have won the diamond and taken the losing heart hook in an effort to catch the people in hearts, garnering a magnificent +90 for my efforts.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think most play the double on the second hand as responsive (perhaps cards but not necessarily promising perfect shape). It would not occur to me to bid at the 4 level with the first hand, although it is correct this time. If your values were in spades it would be a bad choice. I would however have made a negative double to start with.
July 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems the partnership had lots of opportunities. On the given auction, what was wrong with raising 3 to 4? Now if the auction has been 1 - P - 1 - 2 - X - 4 -? I can see N/S not finding their fit.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is where the director should have taken a poll, though it might be hard to find many 4 bidders with the N hand. I can't imagine P not being a logical alternative, in which case the law is quite clear that this gets rolled back to 6.
June 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When you titled this as “flexible” signals, I assumed we would have a fast spade=count, slow spade=suit preference situation. I've certainly played against enough opponents who seem to have this agreement.
June 30
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
too bad 100%/100% isn't an option
June 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the states 2 is never natural….. (joke)
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
N did not bid 4. Backpedaling after the agressivish 3 bid?
I guess the question is whether S should bid 4 now or is 4 enough?
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Apologies. I missed a bid in the sequence so none of this makes any sense.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stu, having gold rush has an enormous effect.
From our rather small but delightful Sunriver regional

Tuesday Open Pairs - 21.0 Tables
MPs A B C Names Score
13.56 1
10.17 2
7.63 3

Wednesday Open Pairs - 14.0 Tables / Based on 42 Tables
MPs A B C Names Score
22.75 1
17.06 2
12.80 3

Thursday Open Pairs - 38.0 Tables / Based on 78 Tables
MPs A B C Names Score
33.86 1
25.40 2
19.05 3
14.28 4

Friday Open Pairs - 13.0 Tables
MPs A B C Names Score
10.06 1
7.55 2
5.66 3


Wednesday and Thursday with gold rush, Tuesday and Friday on their own
May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I either hold Kxx, AKxx, xxxx, xx or void, KQ1098765, Kxx, Qx.
You figure it out
May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While I wouldn't criticize 3 in a not tempo sensitive auction, it is far from clear. Assuming a poll establishes that pass is a logical alternative, the contract should be adjusted back to 2S (IMHO down 1)
May 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
sorry I messed up the auction, don't know how to cancel
May 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ian, if you bid 2 natural, and your partner responded 2, wouldn't you bid a lot of hearts?
May 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
e/w certainly should reach 4 on this auction - either directly over 2, or a raise of 2 to 4. N/S +100 based on their defense of the actual hand
May 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
since it's a double dummy analysis, seeing the other two hands might help….
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry I disagree. No novice should ever claim against assholes.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree you should be barred here. Given the ruling, 4NT is the bid least likely to be taking advantage of UI (partner can't have 20+ HCP, partner may have thrown in a desperate bid to not bar you), but I would just make my normal bid here and accept any ruling against me without complaint. I think at the table in a non UI situation I would pass, but certainly would contemplate bidding on.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would suggest that a director monitor the table any time these two pairs face each other. And no recess for either team until they grow up.
May 5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 67 68 69 70
.

Bottom Home Top