Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Randy Thompson
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I opened this hand in my 2/1 or KS partnerships, I'd owe partner a point and half a quick trick and technically I'm not supposed to be light on more than one requirement (2QT, 12 HCP, 7 LT). With 6 losing tricks, it's a tough hand to pass. I don't think you are close to alone in your notion (well, in our age demographic anyway) and I'm certain that one of my partners would pass this hand.

I confess that I would open the hand even in my conservative-opening partnerships because Bridgetta didn't give me the 10 and 10 to encourage me to pass. And, I don't see ANY problem with reopening with 3. My partners would know that I have lots of offense but not lots of power or I would have reopened with the double they likely wanted.

The idea that we will balance them into game likely arises in afternoon club games, not serious competition. WHAT game on this auction could they reach over 3? The spade ship has already sailed, as has the heart ship and 3N is only possible in a novice game. The idea is to balance them into 3 down one or to get our +110 if they sell to 3.
Feb. 17, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner has a penalty pass of 2H doubled, he won't be happy if you pass. He'll understand if you bid 3 and it's wrong, but not if you pass and it's wrong. I think your red suits would have to be reversed to pass with a 6-card club suit – so you would know he isn't trap passing.
Feb. 17, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would bid 2. As a long-time weak no trumper, it feels “automatic” to get into a major suit at all forms of scoring and all vulnerabilities. If partner might hold a five-card major, it has to be right to try to find it. If partner would expect 4-5 for a 2 rebid over 2 then I'd STILL do it with this hand, provided that he would correct to 2 with 3-2 in the majors.

If partner expects 4-5, that's not “garbage Stayman” – it's just bidding Stayman on garbage, but with a soft spot to land in a 5-card major. THIS is what a garbage stayman hand really looks like. Imagine that your partner has 12-14 HCP and you can see how this treatment first arose back in the day – born of the terror of passing and hearing “double.” Weak no trumpers all run before the double – which is why a double of their Stayman should show cards and why you shouldn't balance against them with flat hands of any range. If you had them nailed in 1N,then they would have run already. If dealt a flat 18 count in balancing seat, just pass and hope to beat them one. I define balancing doubles here as DONT bids, just to force partners to pass with big flat hands.
Feb. 15, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
this raises the question: Do you play OBAR or not? If you don't then pass is the only sane bid; I play OBAR and would stay with it and double and my partner would alert and take it out to an unbid suit unless he had 5 hearts and 4 sure tricks or 4 hearts and 5 sure tricks. 2N would be ask me for my better minor.
Feb. 14, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You make the telling point – it's mostly about opening bid style. It takes VERY sound openers for this to be a limit. Another factor is whether you play forcing 1N or semi-forcing. If semi-forcing, then you avoid reaching 3 on the min flat openers when pard passes 1N. If you are playing semi-forcing and pard rebids 2 or if he rebids 2, then you would want to bid 3.

I checked the 2 box, but I think it's close because our opening bids are sound (except in my Precision partnership, where this wouldn't even be a max 2 raise). Some correspondence about hands with Danny Kleinman convinced me to be a bit conservative with xxx for trump support. I've been doing better rounding down on such hands. Also pard's most likely short suit is clubs and that could limit this hand's value – if the KJ were the A, then all the points would rate to be working and then vul at IMPs I'd call it a limit.
Feb. 10, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Insufficient explanation (and possibly a pre-alert and possibly illegal, but I'll let others decide that).

When we play DONT non-vul vs a Big NT, we give up on power-based games and bid with any 4-4 or any 6-card suit. So, if pard bids 2 we alert and explain when asked: “4+ diamonds, 4+ of a major, 0-25 HCP”. Just saying “diamonds and a major” is NOT an adequate explanation. This is a similar situation. BTW, in each of those cases, you should WANT to tell the full truth! This will instill a sense of paranoia in the opponents that they are the only ones being “picked on” with this call and cause them to do something silly.
Feb. 10, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Oops, missed the first double. Undo. Undo. Still bid the same, but discussion before was gibberish. When this is his second double, pass becomes much more of an option!

4 could let us find our 5-3 major instead of our 4-3 major, but it might also let us find our 4-3 major instead of our 3-3 major or our 5-4 club fit. How would pard bid with 1-5 in the minors and 4-3 or 3-4 in the majors? If he is very strong here, couldn't he bid 3M over 3 to show that suit, extras and another place to play? I would bid 4.
Feb. 10, 2014
Randy Thompson edited this comment Feb. 10, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass will violate the law of total trumps – never name a suit as trumps where the opponents have more of it than you do. Pard is suggesting the 4-3 with HIS three-card suit. If he doesn't like clubs, try diamonds. If he has 4 hearts and doesn't have 5 diamonds, get another partner.
Feb. 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do we think partner has 3 tricks outside diamonds? If not, aren't they cold for 4M? The cost (if any) of -800 happens only if someone doubles 5 and his partner sits for it. As one of them will be void or both will have a stiff, is that likely? Even -800 is likely a small loss to their 620-680 or so playing in a major. Give partner something like 3-1-5-4 shape and a couple of black cards and we could easily be down only one in 5. Even 3-2-5-3 will produce a good save against 4M. It is a mortal sin against the Goddess Bridgetta to bid less than 5 now and then bid 5 later.

IMO, 4 is far too gentle a bid. All it does is deny them cuebids and splinters, but won't impede them from bidding their major suit game.

Psychs work okay in bidding problems where partner can't bid again, but in real life you will be pulling penalty doubles all the way up to the 5 you should have bid at your first turn.
Feb. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I played for several decades against Peter Boyd and always thought he had the best practical judgment of all the many top level players in the Washington area over the years. When my partner and I had a dispute over some bid, he was the only player whose judgment we would both accept as “right.” If Peter disagreed with our choice, we accepted that it was wrong. Peter is the partner we all wish we had sitting across the table – Stevie Robinson is one lucky player to have that in real life.

I first learned about Peter when I was in law school at Georgetown in the early 70's. The best player in our group there (and the best player I actually knew at the time) was griping about having to add Peter as a fifth to their Regional Swiss team when Peter asked to be on the (very strong young) team. (He had wanted to play 4-handed.) Knowing who Peter was, but having never played against him, I asked my friend, “so, why not just say no to Peter?” He looked at me as if I were nuts and instantly replied, “Then we'd have to try and BEAT him!” Hello! He's THAT good? Nothing I ever learned from watching and playing against Peter over the years ever suggested otherwise.

All these candidates are worthy, as is Marty Bergen, but I'd have to go with Peter.
Feb. 6, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would double (intending to correct clubs to diamonds). 2S (Guessing Michaels) could work, but why broach the 3 level on purpose? IMO, 2H is dreadful, much riskier than double with less upside. If not allowed to double, I'd pass. If 1N were forcing, more could be said for passing (for now).

Against a standard pair, their auction has claimed at least about 17 points or so, so a partner should give us the leeway to get our side into the auction with light shapely hands like this one. The hand short in spades must be the one to get us into the auction or this will too often become an opening lead problem.
Feb. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is probably a hand where “abstain” is the best choice. I prefer 6D to 4D at my first turn and there is no way I'd even consider passing 4H now. Pard could have shown a very good hand with just hearts by bidding 4H at his first turn. He could have bid 4C leaping Michaels with a strong two-suiter. He surely has 5-4 or 6-4 in the rounds and a hand too good to bid 3H. I would have bid a conservative 5D before and now I'm even closer to bidding 6D, but I am a bit worried about what this partner might think this sequence shows and will settle for 5D, mostly because the opponents have competed only to 3S and not 4S. THEY are telling me that partner has at least 2 and maybe 3 spades, which might mean he has a stiff diamond? I'm expecting 2-5-2-4 from partner, with good points but not such great hearts. Probably best to play in the 7-2 or 7-1 diamond fit, where I hold 11 useful cards, instead of clubs, where I may hold only 4 or 5.
Feb. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, but regardless of the source, those are inferior methods. Double for penalties of at least one major (and GF if don't double 2M); 2M for invite+ in corresponding minor; 2N for the minors; 3m competitive; and 3M to show stopper and ask for 3N if pard has OM stopped is WAY better. Those methods make this an easy 2N bid and one that can withstand bids of 3M by LHO. With stronger hands and the minors, raise partner's pick or cuebid over partner's pick.
Jan. 7, 2014
Randy Thompson edited this comment Jan. 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are obvious reasons and standing rules of thumb that say not to double, bid 3, bid 3N or Pass. But, you gotta pick a poison. At matchpoints, I'd pass and hope any plus score would beat all those who guessed wrong among double/3/3N. At IMPs, I think I'd double and involve partner in this nightmare and leave 4 games available. Best hope is that he passes the double!
Jan. 4, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My first Sectional win was a Women's Pairs!. A slow judge kept my (law and bridge) partner from showing up in time for the Men's Pairs, but the Women's had an odd number and they let us play in it for free. We only got credit for a section top, however, as were genetically ineligible to win the event.

My First Blue Ribbon Q came when a committee upheld a director's ruling that both teams lost the last match of a Flight A Regional Swiss Teams. One player, made a joke and said “uppercut,” as he played a trump with a flourish at some point. Declarer then took a bizarre line of play and went down in the cold contract. The Director ruled that the team of the player who made the improper comment got the score for the game making because it surely would have made absent the improper comment rattling the declarer; but that the declarer wasn't allowed to be profoundly stupid, regardless of the comment, so his team got the score for the game going down one! That caused both teams to lose the match. Cool. :)

I gave up Precision back in the 1970's when a LOL psyched a three-card spade suit against me and we couldn't find our way to our vul 4 game. I'm trying it again these days, as the methods for coping with comp have been wildly improved by Rodwell and folks seem to leave us alone when we open 1 more often than they did back in the 70's).

I was knocked out of the Spingold when the late Alan Lebendig and his partner bid 7N off an ace in the last quarter of the match. My partner and I had the same auction up as they did – right up until my partner believed me when I signed off in 6N after having asked for keycards. At the other table, our opponent went on to 7N. Our teammate had his hand on a safe sequence lead (T from T98x) until our other teammate, the late Jim Kirkham, holding the ace of that suit, doubled. We gave the lead problem to just about all of the world level players in the Washington DC area and we got ADAMENT opinions that the double called for the lead of EACH of the FOUR SUITS! Guess Lightner Doubles are an inexact tool! Our teammate led dummy's first bid suit (a large contingent voted for that lead) and that was that when the ace was elsewhere. To win, we didn't need for them to beat 7N, we just needed for Lebendig's partner not to have insulted him by raising to a grand after having told the truth about his number of aces. Had they beaten 7N, we'd have won by a large margin.

Playing in a pair event at a Nationals against Zia and George Jacobs, I mis-sorted my hand and didn't notice that both of my black suits were spades until we had reached the five level and I had to correct 5 to 5 in a confusing auction. Bad result. :)

Playing in a Regional Swiss in an unfamiliar partnership with John Jemmott, we had a forcing-pass snafu where I thought I had to double 6 or bid over it. To beat 6 doubled, John had to UNDERLEAD AKQxxx of his suit (that I had supported) to my Jxxxx (they were 1-1) and then get his ruff. When the LOL who was our opponent saw what had happened, she sadly commented, “Oh, if they bid 6 at the other table, they'll make it!”
Jan. 3, 2014
Randy Thompson edited this comment Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Meta Rule that has held up over time: “When a hand that bid 3N to play bids 4N at his next turn, it should be natural.”
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Auctions that begin with 1 or 1 or 2 will for SURE be competitive auctions where the opponents get to exchange information cheaply and our partner will never have a chance to read us for diamonds like this.

I think the choice should be between 4N straight Blackwood and 5. All this discussion of the subtle difference between a direct and delayed 5 seem to me to misplace the focus, as they omit the fact that the opponents will be well placed to make a decision over a delayed 5. I started out with 5 but have come around to preferring 4N.
Jan. 3, 2014
Randy Thompson edited this comment Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With silent opponents, I read partner for 4-4-2-3 or 4-4-3-2 shape. If his three-card minor is clubs we need to bid them again to get our 130. If he's 4-5-2-2, I'll regret bidding again.
Jan. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Into the Valley of Death Rode the 500. 4 with apologies prepared for an annoyed partner if it is wrong. This won't be my first zero, nor my last.
Jan. 1, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1N may not be perfect (I'd rather have the J instead of the T) but it surely beats passing and hoping partner interprets our pattern correctly when we balance with 3 or finding out if partner is on our un-discussed wavelength regarding what 3 or 2 should mean. Partner's take-out double should include a heart stopper. Passing then 3 would likely be our best choice if we had no K. Pard will get our shape right on that sequence but our values will be understated by enough to miss some good games.
Dec. 29, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top