Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ronald Kalf
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
„There is no such thing as “the actual agreement” in this case (unless North-South can show that there is)“. I can always show our actual agreement because I have it as eBook on my smartphone.
May 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I double 6 and hope pard can double 6 because I would pass it.
Edit: come to think of it, my partner will bid 6 if he can‘t double 6:-)
May 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
E action should be based upon the information given and pass. Then S is likely to bid some number of , probably 3. The X and yummy. If you don‘t believe the explanation, don‘t complain later.
I had this situation when playing behind screens for the first time:
The tray was not in a normal angle which let me believe that my partner opened 1 (polish) followed by an 1-overcall (I should have seen the green card between 1 and 1), I alerted my 1N and explained it as „6-9, semi-balanced, doesn‘t promise -stop“ per agreement. I don‘t recall the rest of the bidding but opps ended up in their normal 4, no harm done. Now my screenmate called the TD and wanted to roll back to 1N X -5. I explained why I bid 1N and I can only assume that he (a German top player) knew that all along. He kept insisting for 10 minutes that the Td should give a corrected score before he gave up.
May 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You decided to bid 4, now stick to it.
May 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I pass because pards reopening bid will tell ME more then I can tell HIM/HER with whatever bid I choose.
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sad, I'm a big fan of Kit.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn‘t call those penalty doubles, a semantic problem.
May 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends upon your methods. According to my book the bid is 2 showing a defensive limit raise or better. Playing NFB 2 is out of the question of course. 3 (natural and forcing) is an alternative, but tends to show a misfit. I‘m not really afraid of 4 but if N bids 4, I must double without being able to show -support.
May 12
Ronald Kalf edited this comment May 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It isn‘t the first time that I ask this question: „please define penalty double“. For me a(ny) penalty double is „pard I expect you to pass unless you have an extraordinary hand“. I don‘t expect that a „penalty double“ of 1N is exactly that, so what is it?
May 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ken and Craig, IMO you miss the point, the one Ken mentions only shortly.
IF 4 SHOWS A HONOUR YOU ONLY BID 4 WITH A HONOUR. PERIOD.
Sometimes you get a good result because of bad bidding and vice versa. When I analyze boards, it‘s not all about bad scores, I care about doing the right thing within the framework of our agreements.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I want to play against the Big Clubbets as much as possible because I‘m the most aggressive bidder in our team and avoid the WNTers as much as possible because I hate WNT (when played by opps). However if the Big Club comes with the WNT, I take both.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4/ as an artificial slam try for / and not just in this situation.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I too use Danny Kleinman’s method for hand evaluation, then add points for length (not shortness!), but the first LP (for 5) only if the suit contains 3+hcp.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Our QUC bidding:
1-1; 3-4; 4N-5; 5-5; 6-7
1 = Polish, 1 because of MA(jors)FI(rst)A(lways), 3 = 19+, 4+,
4 = N takes over captaincy with Kickback, 4N = 3,
5 = Q ask, 5 = Q, not K,
5 = K ask, 6 = K, not K.
No way to find out about length, so 7 seems better then 7N.
May 9
Ronald Kalf edited this comment May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not sure if this would fit in Grumpy Club. In my QUC we open 1 with both minors either way and a 1-opener never has secondary unless strong. Therefore we can use -rebids to show the strong variant.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course N should abide by the law and bid 3, but it all started with S‘s 2-underbid. Hence mostly S.
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With as the minor 3 sets because we can bid both pointed suits to show stoppers. Here we cannot show a -stopper naturally and need to improvise. Per our agreement S would bid an artificial 4 (in stead of 3) to unconditionally set .
4 does not deny 6crd , because 4 is non-forcing, whereas 4 id forcing.
May 6
Ronald Kalf edited this comment May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted, too fast again.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If they are world class players I can only conclude that N purposely formulated his question in this way, hoping to extract information that s/he is not entitled to.
May 3
.

Bottom Home Top