You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Were I to play Precision it would be exactly like that. And I would hope that Kit publishes a book. I‘m trying to get a picture about it from Kits Korner.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I‘d rather go down fighting then choose the wrong minor. If you do bid it should be 2♣. If someone has to play in a 4-2-fit the least you can do is play it yourself.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You don‘t play Mini-Roman because of the 2♦-opening, but to avoid rebidding ambiguities after your 1m-opening. I‘ve played for awhile as Paul suggests without catastrophies, but have no need anymore.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Excellent Randy, i‘m almost sorry that I don‘t play KSU anymore. As I started playing bridge again, I tried in vain to find supporters for modernizing KSU without changing the basics in a dedicated forum (https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!forum/kaplan-sheinwold). Of course suggestions from Frances and Kit are always worth looking at, but what they don‘t (probably cannnot) consider is that it disrupts the whole beautifull reversing structure of the KSU-1m-opening that old school KSers love so much. OTOH the concept behind the reverses were to alien for my (former) partner, whis is why we shifted to QUC. I’m perfectly happy with „my“ Polish, but also glad if I can occasionally play good old KSU.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used to double with „tricks“, usually a good suit to lead or to bid if opps run, but never combined this with FP. Pard would sit for the double with 8+ and stoppers in 3+ suits or any 10+. I guess you can play FP with this kind of X, but seems dangerous if X can also be 16 hcp balanced.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I only read Bridgewinners, is National Geographics about bridge too? Not being US-based I don‘t warch CNN but for news I mostly rely on NDRInfo, a radio station, which probably puts me in an even lower catogary by your measures. No David, I don‘t mind the occasional mirthful, ironic or even sarcastic comment, but I‘m simply tired of these dimwitted pseudoadvices.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would never ever bid this if not discussed. It seems illogical to ask for ♠ Q and then make a GST after denial. Maybe 5N would ask for extra length in ♠, although we generally show Q with extra length. I tried hard to find a meaning, but every time I have one, it‘s nonsense at second thought.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My reasoning is this: 1) X and 1♦ create biddings space for responder, 1♥ is neutral 2) a natural 1♠ doesn‘t take away bidding space, assuming you don‘t need a natural 1♠ 3) natural bids give responder an additional bid, the cue From those I derived that a) X and 1♦ should be constructive b) other 1-level bids shouldn‘s show a defined suit c) 2-level and higher bids should be natural, preemptive one-suiters d) 2N shows a distributional hand with good minors e) 3N is to play based upon a long suit, let responder gueus what to lead.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Now I know that our 1♥/♠/N are called YAC. X is „me too“ and 1♦ is a 3-suiter with both majors. But I also like Tom‘s idea of X/1♦ to show ♥/♠. Like Tomaz I need to know advancer’s bids before deciding to change.
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
2. a) Yes, b) restricted choice, c) give W ♠K and 5♦ makes.
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Of course suggestions from Frances and Kit are always worth looking at, but what they don‘t (probably cannnot) consider is that it disrupts the whole beautifull reversing structure of the KSU-1m-opening that old school KSers love so much.
OTOH the concept behind the reverses were to alien for my (former) partner, whis is why we shifted to QUC. I’m perfectly happy with „my“ Polish, but also glad if I can occasionally play good old KSU.
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
1♣-(1♠)-P=1♦, …-X=1♥ assuming you don‘t need a natural 1♠ and P then n♠ or X shows a trap pass
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf
1) X and 1♦ create biddings space for responder, 1♥ is neutral
2) a natural 1♠ doesn‘t take away bidding space, assuming you don‘t need a natural 1♠
3) natural bids give responder an additional bid, the cue
From those I derived that
a) X and 1♦ should be constructive
b) other 1-level bids shouldn‘s show a defined suit
c) 2-level and higher bids should be natural, preemptive one-suiters
d) 2N shows a distributional hand with good minors
e) 3N is to play based upon a long suit, let responder gueus what to lead.
Ronald Kalf
Ronald Kalf