Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Thomas Berg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Michal

That`s your problem not my problem.

I just tell my good experience playing this way. Take it or leave it!
Jan. 3
Thomas Berg edited this comment Jan. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Probably!
Jan. 3
Thomas Berg edited this comment Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass - what else?
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With 3442 or 4342 and 15-17 and clubs are xx - then I open 1D which in our system promise at least four diamonds.

And this treatment I can recommend. You are sure to find your fit which is not possible if partner has a balanced hand with 0-7p and has to pass your 1NT opening.
Jan. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Spade to Ace and then diamond from table.
Dec. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doesn`t bridge favor finding slams to games? ;)

And with your example next bid will probably be 4S.
Dec. 22, 2017
Thomas Berg edited this comment Dec. 22, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Ray!

No - cause E probably has made another bid than pass when he has at least 3-4 card support for partner! We do not know vulnerability.

But if E pass then I bid 3D and next round I bid my spades. Then I have shown at least 5-6 in spades and diamonds. IMO best way to bid with partner is to show what you got. Do not try to mastermind the bidding.
Dec. 21, 2017
Thomas Berg edited this comment Dec. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well - thats our agreement. IMO it is not an innovation just a matter of agreement - good or bad.
Dec. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very simple - bid your longest suit first and next time your second suit. Partner will not pass your 3D which is forcing for one round.
Dec. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My partner and I bid the hands this way according to our agreements. Openers (N here) doublejump is always a splint with support to responders suit. It is never a honorcue. I can recommend this agreement.
Dec. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
D - 3D (positiv min.9hp)
4H(splint) - 4S(cue)
4NT(RKC) - 5D(1 ace)
5NT (we have all aces and DQ - asking for extras) - 7D
Pass

The keybid is 4H showing 0-1 hearts. After partners positiv respons 3D (we play Lebensohl)
N will play at least 6D.
Dec. 21, 2017
Thomas Berg edited this comment Dec. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Then we have 3 fits - all with 7 trumps! :)
Dec. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am comfortable!

When partner has not opened 2S we know there will be a fit somewhere.
Dec. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
P - 1D
1S - 2H
4H - P

When openers reverse is under partners response it shows min. 17p and max. 5 losers- not GF but forcing for one round.
Dec. 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Roland!

Do you really think it is possible to predict sufficient proofs?

It all depends on the circumstances like in all trials in a court. Some times one proof is enough somes times 42 or 117.

Come on - do not pretend you do not know this! You are for sure not that ignorant.:)
Dec. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Louis!

Yes - but He knew nothing about bridge!
Dec. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Roland!

117!

Silly questions get silly answers! :):)
Dec. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course it was good and lucky judgement - BUT when you have toooo many “good and lucky judgements” THEN “there is something rotten in Denmark”. ;)
Dec. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Michael.

Do not worry Michael. I can think and make my own conclusions without you guideing and telling me what is up and what is down.

And so can other readers too.
Dec. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for sharing!
Dec. 14, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top