Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jim Perkins
1 2 3 4 ... 57 58 59 60
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed. Throwing a denies interest in s. Throwing a low denies interest in s.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I pre-alert anything that I think might surprise my opponents. I also read my opponents' convention cards when I arrive at the table.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am willing to use my abilities to solve bigger problems than “Who has the Queen?”

If only anyone were willing to pay me to do so.

As I approach a zero birthday this summer, I have thought often of how much I regret the 15 or 20 years that I took off from bridge.
May 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
White v. Red I am always thinking of x. Too always, obviously.

But like I said, I think one issue here is playing too much in club games where 2 can be much more insane than at higher levels of competition.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did not yet have the commentary. Ken Rhodes pointing out below that apparently both sides have double fits exposes my blind spot. Note that in my OP I am angling toward possible ruffs. Which is basically never going to happen.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Who's my partner?
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, yes there is a difference between favorable and unfavorable pre-empts. At least I think there should be. :p <ducking>
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you Ken. Although we don't deny 4s (or even 5 with extreme distribution) with 2, the double fit point is well-taken.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes I did. In asking, I acknowledged the obvious blindness from which I suffer. And if I am supposed to be ashamed to not know, I'm not. And I will still be playing bridge.
May 15
Jim Perkins edited this comment May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you are playing this system in order to have negative inferences regarding length available from the 1 opening, then the failure to open 2 is even more of a crime.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't mind playing Namyats, giving up 4m. But if the purpose is to get to slams that we might otherwise pre-empt ourselves out of, I think this is a fine 4Hs. Partner with 3 covers is going to try anyway. If the purpose is to show a hand that may have a defensive trick despite opening 4, then 4 is fine.

So Yu had a near violent reaction to my suggestion that 1 > 4 > 4 and sent me over here to get schooled.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is really the question. Why are we playing Namyats?
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We must burn this village to save it.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the poll results. There is only one bid that is systemically correct. If it doesn't work, it is not the fault of the bidder, but of the system designer.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I PASS I will not lose the post-mortem.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 worked here for reasons I don't really understand.

1 (2 or maybe it was x) 2 (4) 4 and now . . . (5) ended the auction.

After a 4 opening at the other table our teammates found slam.
May 10
Jim Perkins edited this comment May 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
System (still in test mode) is that R shows 4+ card Majors and 5+ card minors up the line by transfer.

Starting with 1 - 2 transfers show weakish hands and 6 card suits (bad weak 2s) in next higher suit.

Starting with 1 - 3 transfers show AKQxxx(x) and out in next higher suit.
May 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Might be a Midwestern thing.
May 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congrats to all. Especially Angeleno Jill.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Oren: Jill is right. But she's not. If you want to have a family and that sort of thing, get a real job. If you want to be happy, stick with bridge. :-)
May 9
1 2 3 4 ... 57 58 59 60
.

Bottom Home Top