Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Martin Lindfors
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 25 26 27 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That ship has sailed by now, we needed to make that call last round. Alas.
9 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Off two tricks is our rule for strong jumps. I can count seven.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Drop Gerber and make 4 a natural slam invite. Opener can always show a diamond slam invite through minor suit stayman.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed that it seems right to open a forcing bid. Now, if there is a correct approach, I think it is to torture partner with cues in everything except clubs until the five level. If partner still can't help, we'll stop there.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you think 3 is forcing, I agree. I am not so sure.

In my methods, I would have known whether pard has extras, since I wouldn't have made a call that forced partner to keep quiet.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We have 20 to 22 points. We have a balanced hand opposite a balanced hand. We are nonvulnerable. All factors point to passing.

Make the ace a small one, and move a club to a major. Then garbage stayman, I think, is better.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Redouble should deny three or more spades, in my view. We can salvage this by bidding game. Note that our minor honors are likely to cash thanks to the double.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not good enough to double, although it is very close. If partner was passed, I would act (1 or double both seem attractive).
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my methods this call is impossible. Partner has a weak hand without pointed suit tolerance; we would open those hands with a weak two bid. That solves this problem.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I like that idea, and there is a good case to be made for paradox responses.

2 - 3 - ?
3: support for hearts, ambiguous about clubs
3: no support for hearts, support for clubs
3: support for neither hearts nor clubs

2 - 3 - ?
3: support for spades, ambiguous about diamonds
3: no support for spades, support for diamonds
3NT: support for neither spades nor diamonds
Jan. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We use the following structure over 2 - 2NT:

3: extras with hearts
3: extras with spades
3: min with hearts
3: min with spades

Bidding the major is a signoff, bypassing is a cuebid. Furthermore, the relay bid after opener shows a max asks for a shortage, e.g.:

2 - 2NT - 3 - 3 - ?
3: club shortage
3: diamond shortage
3NT: spade shortage
4/: no shortage, minor cue
4: no shortage, denies minor cue

This allows opener to show both the shortage and a side cue in a hand such as KQTxxx Kxx xxx x, allowing improved slam investigation.
Jan. 12
Martin Lindfors edited this comment Jan. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David: No, opener is not allowed to bid 4 (he is not allowed to without intervention either, in our methods). He is only authorized to bid up to 3. If opener has hearts, he goes there slowly (double) with extras or bids it directly with a minimum. We don't have a strong hand in the multi.

Anthony: No matter the scoring, I think it's extremely unlikely that (1) we happen to have a twelve card fit, (2) responder has a shortage in the other major, and (3) we are allowed to play in the twelve card fit at the two level. IMPs or MPs, I don't think it matters very much. It's true that perhaps one per cent of the time we might lose.
Jan. 12
Martin Lindfors edited this comment Jan. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Exactly, Craig. Thus, 2 of a major is EITHER a weak pass/correct bid, OR a natural call showing a good hand with a six card suit of my own.
Jan. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good hand for a weak notrump.
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Double suggests more hcp than we have.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think 2 would be outlandish, but I do think that it's anti-percentage.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
5NT for picking a slam, 4NT for a slam invitation.
Jan. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Didn't I bid so that I know what to lead? :-)
Jan. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nice bidding! Would it be possible for you to share your system over 2?
Jan. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suppose the double of 2NT has no agreed meaning, otherwise there would be no point of making a poll.

If it's takeout, it seems fairly safe to double 4 to suggest a possible sacrifice. We're on lead so partner is not going to be able to goof up too awfully much.

If it's anything but takeout, I think it seems clear to pass and let partner take another call.

I'll risk that it's takeout.
Jan. 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 25 26 27 28
.

Bottom Home Top