Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Bill Segraves

Bill Segraves
Bill Segraves
  • 22
    Following
  • 4
    Followers
  • 99
    Posts
  • 0
    Favorites

Basic Information

Member Since
June 16, 2019
Last Seen
3 hours ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Long-time student of the game. Slowly returning to active play and giving back.

Regular pards and I are always looking for the strongest competition we can find.

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
None
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Responding 2!c with exactly 4!s +4!c GF?
More like 5-9 normally. Works very well.
Responding 2!c with exactly 4!s +4!c GF?
In practice, we have not found either to be problematic without KI, but I am particularly curious as to what people see as the potential problem with Gazzilli after 1 - 1.
Responding 2!c with exactly 4!s +4!c GF?
I had looked pretty hard before I asked, but encouraged by your post, Oren, I gave it another run with a variety of other search terms. http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/1s-or-2c-which-one-is-more-common-in-experts/ Thanks!
Am I Old Fashioned?
Partnership agreement. But I would not wish to have the agreement that it was non-forcing. One of my partnership meta-agreements is that effective game and slam bidding gets priority over improvement of partscores.
Responding 2!c with exactly 4!s +4!c GF?
Interesting. I think of 1 - 1 as a very nice start. Pard will next define their hand with 1NT, 2 Gazzilli, some other bid limited by non-Gazzilli, or some rarer well-defined conventional rebids. And I think of this as perhaps the easiest of Gazzilli starts, as 2 ...
Responding 2!c with exactly 4!s +4!c GF?
"Michael Rosenberg has argued persuasively that it's best to respond 1♠, but if I remember the details of his scheme correctly, it required some nuanced agreements." If anyone knows a source for those arguments and agreements, please post it, thank you!
Responding 2!c with exactly 4!s +4!c GF?
"The problem with 1♠ first on GF hands is the dreaded 2 bid." If you mean after a 1 opener, then this can be solved by the sub-invitational initial 2 response, making the 2 rebid forcing, per Biddle and Caprera comments at https://bridgewinners.com/article ...
Preempting Over a Preempt Redux (When Partner Has Passed)
Wouldn't 5 have been pretty strongly suggestive of slam?
Preempting Over a Preempt Redux (When Partner Has Passed)
Good rules will do a lot to prevent the all-to-common forcing pass different-page disasters, but on an auction such as this one, how to have a *partnership* decision as to whether to pass 6 out, double it, or bid on to 6? How often will we want to ...
Preempting Over a Preempt Redux (When Partner Has Passed)
For Frances and those who "liked": How much is 4 bidder counting on from partner when bidding to make? About how many losers is 4? What should passed partner have to consider putting 4 bidder in slam?
.

Bottom Home Top