Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ronald Kalf
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 101 102 103 104
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMO it’s good that Eugene observes the limits of what can be written on BW. I stopped reading Mr. Wilsmore‘s witch-hunt stories anyway.
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Anytime we are forced to the 3-level in responders suit. This includes 1m-(p)-1-(2);X as well as 1m-(p)-1-(3);X. If opener can bid 2 in responders suit, this shows 3 and we bid 4th suit with 4. This is based upon an idea from Robson&Segal for a WNT environment.
We decided to keep the support double after seeing Kit‘s vote.
15 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I changed my mind. Our book says support double and we‘ll keep it that way.
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I’d say this is another example of the GB-X introduced by Kit in „avoid the ruffs“
June 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Taking this GB-X one step further, I‘d expect that X then 3N asks for a stopper. Consequently if the X is on 3 pard should bid 3N with and 4 without stopper. This treatment would make the famous Thrump-double superfluous or am I missing something?
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Something is missing from my comment, it should read:
If double is invitational you have to respond paradox style. So (2♦)-X-(3♦)-X;(P)-3 don‘t accept -inv and…-3 accept -inv, not -inv. Kit‘s method is superior because it‘s more important to show your suit if you want to invite. With a merely competitive hand you have already achieved your goal if opps bid one higher.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If double is invitational you have to respond paradox style. So (2)-X-(3)-X
June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Once a month my regular partner plays in another club and I play in our club with someone who is available. More often then not this is an advancing player or even a beginner and my advice - based upon what I see from their declare play - is „make a plan before you play to the first trick“. If this plan is based upon counting losers or winners is secondary.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would you bid 2N without a -stopper?
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yet another of your good ideas which is now part of our agreements.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Independent of other agreements, NO, NO, NEVER.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
„We have found that responsive doubles at the 3-level aren't particularly useful.“ How about 4-level, responsive or emphasizing penalty?
June 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Great Job Kit and team.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course I alert when playing KSU.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I too have fond memories of KSU and its reverses. Remember 1-1M; 2 F1 with reverse strength could also be short.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4N is easy, 2-suited t/o. As for X I miss one option: optional. It‘s neither t/o nor penalty. As for both „oh no, not that again“. I agree with everything Martin except for the „basically it‘s t/o“ part.
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It depends upon agreements. We play split range UNT and this would be a minimum strong UNT. Assuming the bidding continues as shown, I would double 5 to show the upper range emphazising defending and pard has an easy pass. With the minors switched I’d bid 6.
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, you decided to pass 3, you didn‘t bid a competitive 3, you didn‘t double to invite, you didn‘t force with a 4-level bid. Don‘t start complaining that you don‘t know what to do after 4.
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul, there is a difference bwtween 8xxxx and KQxxx
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A reopening X by a multi-opener???
June 2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 101 102 103 104
.

Bottom Home Top