Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ronald Kalf
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In your book! In my book it merely says “I would have bid 1”, which is also non-standard. In Germany I guess the majority is with Anthony.
Sept. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 is limited and non-forcing, 3 is an invite, meaning less then an opening bid here. The upper limit of 2 is to low to think about slam. Therefore 4 is non-forcing. It is not a sign-off, with a misfit you have to pass now. KQJxxx in isn't worth a dime, pass. Bid 5 with A if you have controls in the round suits and/or an honour in .
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Then I'd better play with Sabrina.
Sept. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Sabrina, I'm the second 2-bidder. @Anant: now we either play in or in a 5-4--fit. Yes, I consider 2 forcing. I hope Peg agrees.
Sept. 7, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Timo, thank you for prompting me into thinking more carefully about FJ/FNJ even if if doesn't change my mind because bidding 4 now is probably the only chance to show good -support. I agree that the 4th trump is worth something, maybe half a trick on average. In partscore competition we need to know if we want to apply LoTT. If the hand belongs to us, it is (just) part of hand evaluation. If opps intervene on the 2-level, you can differentiate between 4crd (2N) and 3crd (cue) raises. Over a 3-level overcall this is no longer possible. The only statement on needing 5+4 for an FJ is after 1m-opening, but this is because you may want to play in M. There are lots of examples for FNJ with 3crd support (even a doubleton) on pages 60-64. I do admit however that this is not exactly the same situation.
Sept. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Timo: I'm not sure if there are any examples. On the same page it reads “Obviously you are under severe pressure, and consequently your bids must be more flexible. Still, you must not be lazy. With a reasonable (high-card) raise to four-major you must not jump to game, which shows a semi-preemptive hand with a high ODR.” Surely S has enough high cards and enough for a raise to four. @Patrick: Tell me more, I'm always interested in brighter ideas.
Sept. 6, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Page 37: “ Jumps to game are generally natural and to play, except in sequences where responder jumps to 4 opposite a spade opening/overcall; or to 5 opposite a diamond bid. If responder wants to play in 4 over 1-(3)-? he must bid 3 (forcing) and follow with 4.”
Sept. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robson and Segal may not be the only authorities on competitive bidding, but if you read their book you'll probably admit that their ideas make a lot of sense.
Sept. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A few comments. @Ray: if you open balanced 11 counts, you can open this hand. Opening light per agreement is not a problem. @Michael Day: In that case you don't need to be “sorry”. 4 to show a minmum (for you sub-) is a waste of bidding space as long as pard can have a huge hand. Still 4 should say that you don't have a slam hand. I agree with Paul that non-serious 3N is better then non-serious cues, but I agree even more with Kit that 4 showing a void is the best bid. The difference between a void and a stiff is often underestimated. @Dale: Don't splinter with a stiff A or K (or a void for that matter). All in all S is more to blame, AJ of is worth 3 points opposite a singleton, the stiff A is worth 3+3 giving a total of 14, not something to volontarily bid over 4.
Sept. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Before commenting on the bidding, I strongly recommend reading “Partnership Bidding at Bridge” by Robson and Segal. After reading S would bid 4 showing the suit and support in one bid. Their mantra is “support with support” and your problem started because N didn't know about the -fit. As it is, I understand 3, planning to rebid 4. Be aware however that pard will not expect such good support if the bidding continues …(p)-3-(p)-4. Anyway, W's 5 is the next challenge. If you are not sure if forcing pass is on, as it should be, I can understand 6. I can see no reason for S to bid 7 however.
Sept. 6, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMO Anti-Splinter is most helpfull with super accept. Opps bidding doesn't change this.
Sept. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is exactly the problem: aletring have made CCs superflous in the eyes of most. I don't see CCs in the clubs I've played during the last years. Also I don't see the time problem. In a club you play against the same players often enough to make taking a closer look worthwhile. That's how it used to be in the pre-alerting days. Plus, you can always take a second peek if a bid comes up.
Sept. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3014 or whatever is totally irrelevant to the meaning of 4N, because it tells you something about the responses to 4N. IMO correct would be 4N = asking for keycards. Then 5? = 0 or 3 keycards. If you are very fastidious even “asking for aces” is not the meaning of 4N, it should be “forcing, strong interest in slam, but not sure if we have sufficient key cards”.
Sept. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed! 4N? RKCB 3041! Great.
Sept. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Here's another idea: Why don't we alert leads and carding?
Aug. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another fine example of the folly of alerting. The convention card shows the meaning of 2, no need to ask, no UI, no problem. As it is Aviv has the correct solution. BTW is the name if a convention adequate description of a bid? Why in heavens name is Ogust not alertable?
Aug. 31, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Aug. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I started playing bridge in 1970 in th e Netherlands ACOL was widely used. There were 3 basic variants vulnerability dependent NT, 16-17 or 10-12 by the wild young ones. Also we had “British” choosing the 4crd by the rebid and “Dutch” bidding 4crds up the line. Then there was K-S wit a 12-14 NT and 5crd M. All properly documented on the convention card. Some freaks (like me) played exotic system like Roman Club. Then came Precision, Regres (a forgotten and now forbidden relay system with a strong pass) and more. Again all was properly documented on the convention card, which everybody reads. Until 1978, when I stopped playing Bridge, everything was fine.
Cut.
In 2012 I restarted Bridge (now in Germany) and found bidding boxes (they are ok, even if slamming the X card on the table gives the same information as a LOUD X). Plus I had to learn to “alertieren”. You won't even find the word in a German dictionary. The rules are different from country to country. I don't think you will be able to find many people who know the complete alerting procedure. Since the beginning of 2016 X is on the list of potential alertable calls, but I haven't met a TD able to explain when a X is alertable and when not for all cases.
Are we really better of with alerts. I would rather go back to the old days where convention cards where used and red even in club games.
Aug. 31, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Aug. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are right, extra values only if you seldom raise on 3. KS allows raising on 3 only with the value of 15+. IMO this is sound, the real value of WNT is when you DON'T open 1N. 1-1; 1N is different, because in KS you don't open 1N with 5crd M. The rebid shows 12-16 and could even have a singleton . Contrary to 1m-1M opener is invited to raise with 3. 1-1N does not deny 4crd . Of course I alert this 1N-rebid. I do NOT alert that a raise could be on 3, althoug this is also debateble.
Aug. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry, IMO we're taking full disclosure to far. I play 1N 12-14 and hold Kxx, Ax, Jxx, AQxxx and open, guess what, 1. The bidding continues -1; 1N-3N. Pard explains 1N-rebid as 15-17. 3N makes because RHO could see that I must have at least Q in stead of the J for my 15 count.. Should the score be adjusted because we didn't explain that we can upgrade 14 count with a good 5crd to 15?
Richard, 15-16 or 15-17 is not a big difference for the defense, especially if you consider possible up-/downgrades. 12-16 is rather unusual, I'd say. That is something I would alert. In our system 1-opening is always unbalanced, so it's obvious that a 1N-rebid is not balanced. We alert, because a) this is an unusual concept and b) we must explain what it shows.
Aug. 30, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Aug. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you play 1N 12-14, 1m-1M; 1N shows 15-17, this is obvious. 1m-1M; 2M shows extras either in high cards or in distribution, this is equaly obvious. Anyone to whom this is not obvious will not be able to use the information even if I give it. Why bother? The problem with all those alerts is that people are getting lazy and stop thinking, which is not good if you play bridge.
Aug. 30, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top