Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Gill
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doesn't tanking followed by the cheapest bid show this hand?
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did not play this hand but I'm confident in the veracity of the story. I figured I'd post in case both of the perpetrators miss this thread. This is by far the unlikeliest thing I've heard about happening at a bridge table. 6NT was cold (and bid!) on the K lead with:

Qxxx
J
AQJ10
Jxxx

AJ9
AK108x
Kxx
xx

Pretty sure I got the layout right. You need RHO to hold the singleton A and exactly Q9x, then to pick up spades for no losers, probably just by playing for the double finesse. The good news is that spades coming in isn't so unlikely given LHO must hold x4x6 already, but still I think our best guess was somewhere around 10000-1 against. If anyone wants to math it feel free.
Feb. 19
Mike Gill edited this comment Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I certainly agree the best way to *establish* 5 winners is to lead the 5-card suit. If we need to cash 5 tricks right now though…
Jan. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Second round? That's actually fine as I can effectively fall back on David's line below. I think if RHO wins the K and plays a heart I can pitch my losing diamond, but as long as LHO ruffs from 5 and plays a trump I'm pretty sure I'm toast.

I was originally thinking that this defense might be unclear enough that I shouldn't commit to playing LHO for the KQ but I'm thinking David's line below is better. Certainly saying A heart was clear was an overstatement.
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm still not convinced that I can make it on many layouts, but it seems clear to start with A and then continue a heart.
Jan. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, that would clearly be wrong. It's over LHO's 3NT bid.
Dec. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm in the forcing with a diamond stopper camp. Stoppers in both minors are important here since they could have 5 of either. What shape would you really want to bid 2 natural on - it almost has to be 6 diamonds, and that is pretty unlikely with RHO having 4+ diamonds. And anyway the window for needing to bid 2 over 2 is so small with diamonds known to be breaking 4-x or 5-x (if RHO is sane).
Dec. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To be fair before that thought my first one was “wow I'm really committed to this psych”
Dec. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
* I actually don't think partner promises 3 spades. I just don't see what else you can do but double if you have Ax AQx AKQxxx xx or something like that. I'm not even totally convinced it's wrong with x AQJx AKQxxx Ax - it's not like overcalling 3NT is that appealing and that seems like your only other real option.
* I almost posted this at favorable instead of what actually happened. Now you couldn't even come up with a favorable 2 opening so the subset of hands where you might want to bid 2 here is even smaller. How far does it have to go before it's not worth it? What if you had a multi 2 to show a 2-7 HCP preempt and 2M showed 8-11?
* Curious if anyone could come up with a good meta to handle things like this. Surely hands with 0-2 (say) HCP and 6 spades are rare here but you definitely could have one. Or does it just have to be “well it's possible to construct a hand where this bid is natural so it's natural”.

For the record I was a little surprised Noble answered as he did as usually I'm the one who thinks things are forcing when he doesn't.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, hence the “~” on the original 19-22.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Coulda have been more specific I suppose. Double and min pull is 19-22, double and jump shift is GF.
Dec. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No special agreements.
Dec. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah I missed the PH status - you could still have a slam but I agree it's anti-pct. Still, the 2 bidder could have a lot more and then you will get too high.
Dec. 8, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's possible to construct hands where partner would pass it out and your side could profitably bid 4. The problem is that partner isn't passing 4 with your example hand since he can make a slam opposite many normal 4 bids.
Dec. 8, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very important to learn to pass with hands like this, especially with length in their suit. If you belong in 4 partner isn't going to pass it out.
Dec. 8, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed we did and thanks!
Dec. 8, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Guess this was a dud. I was thinking that since doubler could be weaker in balancing seat this might be too strong, but evidently I didn't make it strong enough.
Dec. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah I was wondering how to do that actually, thanks. Will update the articles.
Nov. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends a lot on your style. If you would raise to 2 holding a 35(32) minimum then I think you have to bid 3 on this.
Nov. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not sure - unfortunately the vugraph archive for this quarter was somehow overwritten by the first quarter so both quarters show up as the same boards.
Nov. 16, 2017
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
.

Bottom Home Top