Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ig Nieuwenhuis
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that a well designed mix of strong and weak hands in 2-level-plus opening bids will outscore such a system in the long run (but I will readily admit I'm biased as that is the way we designed our system).
interesting question though
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
how about South bidding 2 before supporting 's?
That would make the auction gameforcing at least. In my own agreements the correction of 2NT (over 2) to 3 offers a slam-positive hand and invites cues. so the follow-up I'm proposing is:
1 - (1) - 1 - pass
2 - 2NT
3 - 4
4 (also promises a -cue) - ???
either RKC or 5 will then get you to slam
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I assumed that 2 showed A mini-splinter (which is my own agreement :-)), in which case I can bid 4.
If it specifically shows a -minisplinter I think you have to lead …
Feb. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
agree, but would first want to know which types of hands XX
Jan. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
even in (very) basic precision this sequence MUST have been discussed. So I bid the result of that discussion.
Jan. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
in my agreements: Yes.
Jan. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yup, I would open this 2NT (with puppet that/transfers doesn't miss a major-fit)
Jan. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
depends on agreed meaning of several bids.
AND: 3 preemptive? in 's, with 's? that may influence applicable agreements
Jan. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've bid my 6-5. Partner may need to know my -control to place the contract.
Note: in my book 2 agrees 's as he did not bid an immediate 2 showing better 's.
However: I would have another problem as we open this hand differently and then a -bid would be on the 3-level. Reaching an optimal contract would be much more difficult then.
Jan. 18
Ig Nieuwenhuis edited this comment Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
this is what Namyats was made for …
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What's the upper limit of a ‘light’ preempt?
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
since the opps showed 2 suits:
could partner be offering a -stop and not a -stop?
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm the doubler, BUT:
I have agreements about this kind of sandwich-bids
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
About selection
amongst 10 champion pairs
can class be proven?
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
with the agreements given I think X and then 4 over 3 describes this hand as I don't think this is a full GF opposite a 12-14 NT
Dec. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used my own methods before I saw “standard methods”: low encouraging :-)
Nov. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This type of hand is one of the reasons we distributed different handtypes over our opening-bids and customised the followups. I can tell partner that I have a semiGF onesuiter in clubs. We might get too high in 3NT, but opposite the right ace and the spade queen I have play for 5's. So I'm willing to try for the game-bonus and lose an occasional 5/6 imps
Nov. 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
System forget by East?

In NL normal to play (as added in the description) that 3 is a good weak 2 in 's.
In that case East has no reason whatsoever to bid NT, which probably lacks a -stop. So my conclusion is that East thought that 3 was a good weak 2 in 's. In that case 3NT is logical (the pause before bidding suggests East did not remember what he plays with THIS partner)
Nov. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I dont get the voting (I am the lonely passer; so far):
what is the expectation: that partner suddenly has extra values? In that case he would probably have started with any other bid than 2.
I have a bad hand; partner just overcalled and East passed with presumably either very short hearts and most o the spades in opps hands. where are our tricks coming from?
Nov. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
was a direct 3 a consideration?
I would have thought about it very seriously.
It's often good to bid a long minor over the multi directly if you can.
Nov. 21, 2017
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
.

Bottom Home Top