Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Paul Friedman
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 92 93 94 95
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not see why facing a passed hand should make a difference in the forcing/non-forcing nature of 1z. Responder's maximum is obviously lower but I see no reason why responder's minimum would be different. Nor can I think of any other argument in favor of changing the meaning of 1z.
Jan. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner has biddable hearts. If not, we will have a discussion after the session.

2N seems reasonable now. I have a feeling that if we can not make 3NT we also will not make 2 but I'll stick with 2NT. Second choice is pass
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rule #126©:

When holding xxx is a side suit partner has:
xxx when you bid aggressively, but
Ax or x when you bid conservatively

This is a weak spot in 2/1. In standard, you can show your clubs and then invite with 3. This doesn't help with diamonds, but gives partner an idea of where honors and length would more than pull their weight. Make your hand a tad stronger and you need to decide at once whether to force to game or not. On the plus side, quantitive bidding gives less information to the opponents.
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I can bid 2 and then support spades to show a limit raise, I do so. If my system does not allow me to do other than bid quantitatively, I choose by the partnership's style. If we open junk, it's a maximum constructive raise otherwise it's a limit raise.
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have asked similar questions – after both good and bad boards. Simply curiosity. It never occurred to me that this would be seen as gloating. I had better rethink asking such questions.

The snarky answer of “3-2 .. or not” is not anything I would do. However, the opponent in entitled to focus on the next hand or set and not be distracted with my question. It the opponent wants to lie about this or what was eaten for breakfast, I see no Law to prevent it. Not someone I'd play or team with, though.
Jan. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John:

A Queen ask might be used to decide whether to bid a slam slam or not. It might also be used to decide whether to bid a grand or settle for a small slam.

A King ask is a Grand Slam try. In fact, partner is not required to show kings. If holding an undisclosed source of tricks, a jump to the grand is allowed (we would always bid 7 when accepting).
Jan. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think I am going to learn anything useful and an leap to 7 shows brio if nothing else, but I'll take it slowly with a double just in case something good happens,
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Excellent advice. You are not looking for the perfect spot. You are simply trying to come out alive.

Could 3 work? Certainly. If it “works” though, there is an excellent chance that partner will raise or (heaven forbid) try for 3NT. Your 3 does, after all, advertise extra values.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming a miracle and the opponents stay out of the auction:

1 - 1red
1 - 1NT or 2something
2

No reverse :)


A problem with opening 1 is that any bid by the opponents or partner other than 1NT means bidding at the three level to show your best suit.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All in tempo:
1 1NT
2NT ???
with responder holding the instant hand.

Unless posed as a Bidding Challenge hand when you expect something strange, I would expect a near unanimous vote for 3NT if the 2NT rebid started at 17. I think it would a majority if the 2NT rebid started at a “good” 16.

Jim: You are almost right about the director's test. I took it and now know the ACBLScore command for adjusting a score for a Fulsome Aroma by a Relay sTand. I still can not solve all issues though. I still can not find a Queen on a two-way finesse or properly adjudicate a hesitation out of turn, for example.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The fear of playing 1NT rather than 3M when responder has a limit three card raise ism I think, very exaggerated. This is particularly when responder is balanced.

Opener is by definition balanced – otherwise 1NT would not have been passed. Opener's only shapes are 5M(332) and 4=5=2=2 with a maximum of 12 or a poor 13 hcp. When responder has a balanced maximum 1NT, I'd rather be in 1NT than 3M with opener has a balanced minimum.

The losses would seem to come from hands where responder is unbalanced: 3M631, for example. That's a rather small subset of 3-card limit raises.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard: One had to neigh? Hard to provide detailed information that way. ;)
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Douglas:

Don't ask me to explain or defend. The kerfuffle was not my idea. If my opponents want to play it, it would be fine with me.

The advances were dead simple. 2 was Stayman except you bid 3z to show a weak one-suiter in the suit named. 2 of a new suit natural and non-forcing. Three of a new suit was, I think, forcing if overcaller had a “real” 1NT. A cue bid was forcing.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Howard:

That was the crux of the issue.

The either/or question was
Is a 1NT overcall a “multi” type. Balanced 16-18 or weak on suiter
OR
Is the weak type of the 1NT overcall a system psych with the jump to 3 in a a lower suit a psychic control?
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted for 2NT but unlike the author of this thread, I do not have strong feelings. Double could easily be correct/less worse.

If I have a feeling the 2 bidder was the old-fashioned type, I'd double instead.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If my foggy memory is correct Meckwell had their hands slapped for playing this convention. Something about if you psych a 1NT overcall very once in awhile versus an agreement that the overcall might be a weak one-suiter.

I hope someone whose mind still works can clarify or correct.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not think we have the tools to find out what we need to know. Jack's approach (3 hoping partner rebids 3 is nice if it works. You can then try RKC and bid slam if partner has two KC hoping one is not the Heart Ace. If as is likely part bids 4, I think I need to leap to 6 before we have a disastrous misunderstanding.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kevin:

If “it is just bridge” then fine. If, by agreement, a partnership has decided to overcall a supposedly natural 1m opening with balanced 15-18 (or whatever) hands ignoring the presence or lack of a stopper in that suit, I think they own their opponents an alert.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Max:

Of course, the best solution is to bid in tempo. The auction under discussion is a perfect example of begging for trouble. Why was opener caught off guard by the 1NT response? Why hadn't a plan been made for what to do over the most expected responses? I've never understood why an experienced player (not a good player, but any experienced player) would need to hesitate after 1M-1NT.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not on lead yet, I doubled 2.
Jan. 17
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 92 93 94 95
.

Bottom Home Top