Join Bridge Winners
All comments by W J Sund
1 2 3 4 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doesn't Sheehan's Law indicate we need a bit more?
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting. I would have thought Bergen would use “Bypass NT” opposite a passing partner to show a shorter side suit and save Good-Bad for when partner has enough to respond.
April 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed - I'm not quite following. I still read the BWS agreement as I quoted as being forcing rather than not quite forcing??
March 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's forcing in some standards.
Bridge World Standard
When our preemptive opening is doubled:

(a) Responder's redouble is strength-showing, temporarily suggests playing for a penalty, and creates a force to the next level of opener's suit.

(b) Responder's simple new-suit bid below game is forcing, but lead-directional (presumably with a fit).
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Edgar Kaplan had ‘intended as forcing’ sprinkled helpfully through his notes.
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, that's the book. Michael touched on how EK used it repeatedly to expose several NT techniques from both sides of the table. EK said ‘you’ll get sick of this hand.'
Feb. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 is extra but non-forcing for us ( unlike in non-competitive auction) and nothing happened since then to create a force to 5m. The 3 preference cheered opener into taking a shot at getting to 3NT and when that didn't work then bailing out into the ‘safety’ of 4.
June 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 is a COG by our partnership agreements and seems bang on with this hand.
June 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The bots play at a club here. Usually 10 tables. I checked the last 6 times they played - their worst result was 58% and the others range to high 60's. Majority of the players are silver life masters + or close.
March 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This approach is not uncommon –
Reps 2 is inv+.
Opener has 2 non-accept rebids 2 and 3 “old suits”.
Opener's 2NT creates a GF unless Resp simply repeats the 3rd suit
Opener's raise of 3rd suit, a new suit or a jump create GF.
Feb. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted 1NT but not because I think the hand is 14.5 to 17.5, it seems fractionally better than that. But the cost of a 1NT response, or not getting a Spade lead vs NT, or the later blind defense, or just the positional advantage on any lead seems worth more than underbidding by a fraction of a point is likely to cost.
Sept. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Has anyone timed a sectional tournament f2f to see how much of the 21 min per 3 boards in actual cards-in-hand bidding and playing vs moving, score entry, putting dummy down, etc ?
Sept. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm revising mine downward.
After just 16 boards there are only 2 players at 74% or higher out of 1302 results.
There are about 60 players with under 30% who likely won't pay $50 to see that again, so the field will toughen a bit.
July 9, 2017
W J Sund edited this comment July 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All my partnership notes start with versions of - If it's undiscussed then it's a) Natural and b) the weaker of reasonable possibilities. We don't invent ‘obvious’ interpretations mid-auction. That means we don't have the fun that Marshal Miles had with his partners at the table but not having misunderstandings in uncommon auctions is its own pleasure.
June 29, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Imps does make it tougher. At rubber or Chicago we'd just bid 7NT then redouble and split the profit with the opponents.
April 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Jeff,

A ‘play’ or ‘bidding’ comparison.
Large Regional IMP KO.
You're in a tag-team where you and Eric are interchangeable with two top ‘regional pro’ winners.

You can choose either –
1) they bid the hands, then you and Eric play and defend.
or
2) You and Eric bid the hands and the regional pro's then play/defend them.

Which way would you expect to come away with more IMPS?
How close is the decision?
Would you expect Eric's option to be the same?

thanks for doing the Well.
March 29, 2017
W J Sund edited this comment March 29, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1) dbl is neg. rest of sys on.
2) dbl is neg. sys off. Leb variation on.
March 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How much, if any, do you adjust your system or style toward more bashing and less disclosure when playing matchpoints?
July 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed - could you clarify whether that is a “should” or a “must” ?
June 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since I can never be sure it was unintentional ( they are my eyes and I know where his hand is ) I treat it like UI. “why was I looking?”
June 21, 2016
1 2 3 4 5
.

Bottom Home Top