Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Kevin Rosenberg
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 80 81 82 83
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff and Josh, thanks for your comments.

I usually fake a reverse (absent a gadget) on hands of this shape, with no better bid. The idea here, for those who may not know it, is that if partner raises hearts, then they will always be at least 5-4 in the majors, and then you can return to spades. My opinion on this hand is that 2H is especially flawed because 3NT could be the best spot even if partner is 5-4 in the majors, which is why I, like Josh, chose 3C, even though it too has big flaws imo.

Say we changed the hand to Kxx x AKJ10xxx AQ. Absent a gadget, what bid would you both (and others!) choose?
Feb. 20
Kevin Rosenberg edited this comment 23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think all guard squeezes are triple squeezes Dave. I believe this is just a guard squeeze
Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm saying the psych Mike described is a “baby psych”
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
that ain't even a psych (a psych in name only)
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
if you want to psych gently, you could try a jacoby 2NT bid or something of that nature…
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Auction 2 is obviously not a diamond void, and thus yes I think asks for a club lead. You wouldn't double based on diamond honors.

Auction 1 seems strange to me to bid 5d, which seems obviously lead directing, if you had another void. So I don't think you can be asking for a lead in another suit.
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
good analysis of a likely hand. I wouldn't be so strong to say that hand is “almost definite” or “obvious”, but I agree it seems like a likely hand. (some other hands include hands with 7 spades, or 3 card heart suits, though the lowest heart does somewhat indicate 4. Perhaps they have a stiff heart with K109xxx x Qxx Qxx. There are other possible hands).

I still need to think more about the play.
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think if you jump to 2s on every 4234 / 4324 11/12 count, you're missing out. At least some of these hands should bid 2c and then 2N over 2H. Partner will likely get the message that you have 4 spades, and you will have better described your hand imo than just by jumping to 2s.
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
5H shouldn't be an option. I would rather just fake a cuebid than sign off with this much.

Picture - KQxxxxx AKx AJx. A great slam…

Also interesting to play. Possibly Best line is to ruff the spade lead, draw a trump, AK of diamonds, trump to dummy, spade pitching diamond, and run a club. Makes unless LHO had QJxx diamond and KQ club, or perhaps on some 5-1 diamond / 3-0 trump breaks.

If partner doesn't have a void spade, then obviously we will make slam, or at least it will be a great contract. but either way, my AS will often pull weight as a trick.
Feb. 13
Kevin Rosenberg edited this comment Feb. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
seems to me like 4S is probably a better contract than 3N…
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know what the right hand to bid 3N is, but imo this is not it. How does partner know when it's right to pass and when it's right to bid? Here which singleton they have just matters so much, and I don't know how they can know what to do over 3N… I think it puts partner in a very random situation, or at least, I wouldn't know when I'm supposed to pull. Maybe someone can weigh in here?

I think I prefer 2N to 3N, because at least partner with an accept will be able to shape out, and we can get to the right strain.

2N also is better than 3D in that it gets across the strength of my hand a little better. The downside is I don't show my huge diamond fit.

At vulnerable, I might consider bidding 2N, but here I still am worried about playing the wrong partscore opposite 5341, so I will content myself with a large underbid of 3D.

Lastly, over 3D, it is worth discussing what 3H by opener shows. 5341? In that case is 3N 5242 or 5143?

I think I would play as above since it allows us to find our 3-5 heart fit, and there is no great solution anyway, but open to hearing others' thoughts.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
well if it makes you feel any better Craig, I was on the island with you :)

(well maybe - how would you bid if you bid 3H and partner says 3S?)
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
isn't the falsecard of the 7 nullo? I rise ace, they show out, and now I think I can make same as if they covered the first spade with the queen…
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
partner “wanting to defend 1s(x)” is obviously irrelevant, since then they would jump at the chance to defend 3sx :)

That said I definitely think 3N is natural. Perhaps the 3N bidder has something like the AS and QD, though that might be close to too much (to have passed over 3s). Still, I don't see any real reason to assume it can't be natural here.

a 1N response over 1S depends on the vulnerability, but is somewhere around 7-10 HCP… Axxx Qxx Jx 10xxx is an example of a hand where I think it's a better decision to pass at most, if not all, vulnerabilities.
Feb. 8
Kevin Rosenberg edited this comment Feb. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I probably plan to double 3s given the vulnerability. Thus bidding 3D now seems clear given my plan. If this were planned to be my last call, I'd still bid 3D, but then doubling would have more merit.
Feb. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your friend's statement implies that (most) top bridge players gain a (meaningful) advantage over “the next-best level” in virtue of “just KNOWing” lots of information about suit combinations that could only be gained through hours of study (I refer to this information as “this”, or “this stuff” below).

I still disagree with almost every part of this:
1. The claim that a meaningful advantage is gained by knowing this
2. the claim that most top players do just KNOW this stuff
3. the claim that top players are even that much better at this stuff then “next-best level” players.
4. Perhaps even the fact that it necessarily takes hours of study to learn this sort of information.
Feb. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I disagree strongly that this sort of knowledge is what separates top players from good players.

Knowing suit combinations in a vacuum doesn't usually matter on a particular hand anyway, where there are other considerations often.
Jan. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit, what would you respond to a standard 1s opener with the E hand?
Jan. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East is definitwly not to blame I think. West went a little low, and missed a playable game. Game isn't that good anyway.
Jan. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Both North and South probably should have done more. South could have bid one more with a void knowing both sides had a fit. North could have jumped to 4c, as others mentioned.
Jan. 29
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 80 81 82 83
.

Bottom Home Top