Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jordan Lampe
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So partner has something like Qxx or QJx of spades and probably a diamond card, and it looks like 9 tricks will be easy and 12 nearly impossible.
Jan. 31, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How does Responder show a double negative in your system?
Jan. 31, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I was but a young beginner, I was taught that with 6-9 points, insufficient support to raise Opener's suit, but no suit to bid at the 1 level, that I was supposed to bid 1NT.
Jan. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 2 is “not GF” and 2NT shows stoppers in the majors, shouldn't 3 be NF showing a 10-12 minimum without a club stopper? I grant the club stopper is looking dodgy, especially after partner has wrong-sided NT for us, but I don't see how that hand is anything like a minimum.
Jan. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What do you bid after the inevitable 1?
Jan. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand one of the bullet points: “If the opening bid is 1 or 1, it gets one extra dot.” Doesn't that mean any system at all gets 2 dots to start with?
Jan. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 3 is ‘top of the range’ then presumably 3 or 3 can show bottom and middle. Why you would play this way is unclear, but one certainly could play that way.
Jan. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why not? Doesn't East have a 4 loser hand needing only a couple of cards in West's hand to make slam?
Jan. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aren't the people bidding 3 over 1 directly worried about missing a good slam?
Jan. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 2NT is my “slow down” bid, that's my choice. If Partner bids 3 (showing not quite a jump shift), then I settle for game in 3NT. If Partner bids 3NT or something else that says he wants to be in game opposite my 6 count, then I try for slam.
Jan. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, but an X does promise both majors, and I only have one of them.
Jan. 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And the computer program that can ask intelligent questions and make inferences from non-standard conventions (3 opening showing or + anyone?) is even harder.
Jan. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So the definition of “natural bid” is the director goes around and takes a poll of players' opinions, just like in UI cases?
Jan. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Great. So how did everyone know that A-D were “natural” and the others weren't? Write the law. It looks like people more or less matched the ACBL's definition which is “if it shows 4 or more cards in the named (major) suit”.
Jan. 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I have voted for this because I don't see that it is appropriate to attempt to regulate natural bids.”

I think the problem is “what is natural?” Which of the following agreements are “natural” for a 1 opener?

A. 5+ spades, 12 or more high card points
B. 4+ spades, “rule of 20” hand
C. 4+ spades, 8-12 HCP
D. 5 spades, 0-8 HCP
E. 3+ spades, 12+ HCP
F. 2-7 spades, “whatever in my expert judgement is opening strength”
G. more spades than hearts, 0-15 HCP
H. an odd number of black cards
Jan. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sounds like you have an agreement then, and the director was right that you have an illegal agreement.
Jan. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What would you answer if the opponents asked “could your partner have a singleton which is not the Ace, King or Queen?”
Jan. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“… how often the logical choice is different from the one that may seem ‘obvious’.”

This is actually something I don't like about most problem solving books. You can do really well by following the algorithm: Figure out what you are naturally inclined to do. Then look around for the trick that means your natural inclination is wrong.

The problem is, that algorithm isn't useful at the bridge table. Since most of the time there isn't a trick, you could waste a lot of time looking for the trick that isn't there, and your natural inclination was right all along (there's a reason it's your natural inclination, after all!). I want a book that teaches me when it is right to look for the trick.
Dec. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doesn't leading low to the J lose an extra trump trick, even when the split, if RHO wins - now or after a shift?
Dec. 18, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top