Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ronald Kalf
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I understand correctly 3 is doubleton min or max or tripleton min and non-forcing. All other bids accept the invite and are therefore FG? I don't understand your structure, maybe there is a mistake in it?
April 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I currently play double transfers. Not being able to play 2M in a 5-2-fit with a marginal invitational hand bothers me. IMO that is a big advantage of condensed transfers. Finding stoppers AND slam bidding with 5M-4m is better with double transfers. I'm still looking for a structure combining the advantages of both.
April 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And to hell with stoppers.
April 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I advise playing rubber bridge with a couple of friends.
April 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If he didn't see the 2 bid, there is no UI, he wanted to bid 2 and now has to correct it to 3. If he did see the 2 bid, he planned to bid 3, which he now does. Again I can't see any UI. If he has seen the 2 bid or not is information available to all at the table.
April 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Both of Eric's examples are perfect 1 overcalls for us.
April 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yesterday evening: S:xxx, H:AKJx, D:Qxx, C:Kxx. Team, all vul. You open 1N, then -(2C)-P-(P). Do you reopen?
April 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can I restrict the magical snap to my partner:-))
April 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“A better solution would be more complete documentation of system, available to the opponents” Half the players don't even read my convention card, not even if they have to play 16 boards against us in a team competition. Do you really think someone will read my 57 page system book? BTW, If I have to proof some action to the TD I have it available on my iPhone as PDF.
April 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I never play Gerber. Gerber was invented before key card ask, it was simply BW a bit lower. Now that we have RKCB, it's better to play 4 (and of course 4) as Minorwood. In the above sequence, I can't imagine anything but a cue.
April 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Secondly, psyching a convention should be illegal.” I don't like that idea. Psyching is part of the game. I want to be able to overcall UNT with x, x, xxxxx, xxxxxx if pard has passed. If you amend to “… psyching distribution should be illegal.”, you have to decide where to draw the line. This would cover the natural vs. Cap example, but do you really want to forbid a 2-level overcall on 4? (Not that I would dream of overcalling 1N with only 4crd ).
April 27, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment April 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMHO forbidding a pair to play conventions is rediculous. If you start playing a new conventions, mistakes are bound to happen. As my partner says after a misbid: “now I will never forget it anymore”
April 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And how does poor pard know what to expect?
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a sequence where one side shows a real 2-suiter 4NT should be 6 aces BW, if no suit has been set before. In cases like this our agreement is that if I can bid one of the suits below game (in this case 4) other bids (in this case 3, 4) are cue bids for the other suit (in this case ).
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What system would we all play without the “experimenters”? Vanderbilt 1926 I suppose.
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Benoit, Bernard, Michael, thank you, you've convinced me. Even more reason to find a solution, we are playing W(eak)N(o)T(rump)!
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You may be right, but that's exactly hat my partner says, with exactly the same proof. I say if we have a joint 26 points in 26 cards and have 4 cards in one suit, we have an average of 4 points in that suit. That too is just an argument without proove.
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If Bird-Bourke offers more then 1N-3O, I'd be interested to read more. A structure combining 5431 with condensed transfers would be perfect.
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Both natural. Opening 1, then 2 in the sequence shown above should be strong, just like a normal reverse.
April 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually very seldom, otherwise I would reconsider. We do make risky 3-bids every now and then, but I can't remember having a bad score. More often then not, opps bid one more; goal achieved! Just recently: 1N-(2)-3-end. Just made with Qxxxx opposite Kx, admittetly defense was not optimal. Playing Lebensohl (or in our case Wolfsohl) you cannot bid 2N with 2245, but you cannot make a takeout double either.
April 24, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment April 24, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top