Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Richard Fleet
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 600 601 602 603
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I regard doubles from either side as take-out
25 minutes ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would have overcalled 3NT over 1 but fully accept that this might not be a majority choice.
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't play inverted raises
2 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that North should bid 2 rather than 4.
5 hours ago
Richard Fleet edited this comment 5 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm sure that your first sentence is right, Dave. But the OP asked what we thought was the best agreement.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT, assuming that honest, value-showing bids are not totally out of fashion. I think that 1NT is over-conservative vulnerable at IMP.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I refuse to play with someone who bids like this.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not expect partner to bid 5 over 4, whatever he has.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You first have to know what the double means: there are people out there who play all such doubles as showing the bid suit.

Assuming that double is take-out, I think that redouble should show extra values such that opener is confident that his side has comfortably balance of strength and sufficient spades not to fear a penalty pass.
14 hours ago
Richard Fleet edited this comment 14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Philip says
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Possibly not everyone's double of 1.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Non-forcing but progressive so far as I am concerned.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have reread the article. There is no mention of Precision.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit's article did not mention that N/S were playing Precision so I assumed the latter.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would never open that hand. I've polled it to find out what others think.
Jan. 20
Richard Fleet edited this comment Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't have thought that a six-card suit was at all likely. And 11 tricks is a lot to make game in a minor.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Vulnerable at IMP, you can't die wondering whether 3NT is a good contract.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It looks at first glance that North would have done better to pass his balanced filth.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A sensible agreement, Patrick, so long as you are clear on what you are doing.

I once captained an eminent international pair who had the same 2NT bid explained in two different ways in their system file.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've played that but not in a context where 2/1 was FG.
Jan. 20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 600 601 602 603
.

Bottom Home Top