Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Barry Dehlin
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So I confess to being S here, and have some questions:

1. Many are citing the 3 bid as bad, but I see virtually no alternatives mentioned. I do note one suggestion for 2…is this what people here would have bid?

2. Re: bidding 3N over 3, here's a question…should I expect partner to have such a strong hand on this sequence? Does the cue bid suggest extra strength or just that we have the combined strength for game and asks about the heart stopper? Suppose you only think you are in the ~25-27 combined HCP range, how confident are you that we have 8 top tricks (in addition to the K) after a presumed heart lead? Or are people saying it's really so simple as a partner-asked-about-stopper-so-I-blindly-answer situation?
June 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One other detail that could lead different partnerships to different answers here are your standards for the 1 overcall. We will overcall on AQxxx and out even with a flattish hand. Perhaps as a consequence, my string of responses to the given hands include many more preemptive 3 bids with the 4-spade hands than yours.
May 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After the opps have opened and made a takeout double, it's more important to consider the auction competitive in nature rather than constructive for our side. I think 2 is automatic with the first hand.
May 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At some point in the video – I believe well after the director returned with the decision – Garner mentioned to Bates that he typically writes a note to his screenmate in these situations stating that he is always going to bid slam.

My question for the laws experts: Had he actually done that, would it have had any evidentiary weight for either the director ruling or the committee?
May 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are enough “ATB” posts that we could make it a standard format with multiple standardized poll questions: (1) whether/how much blame there is to assess, and (2) who's responsible (standardized as either E/W or N/S)
April 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Most ‘Rule of 19’ hands” is only a guideline, but it's our attempt to put in (overly) simple words what we perceive as the current 2/1 expert standard approach to openings. We've been using this for 1-2 years and are happy with the results, although there's no denying your point that lighter openings can make things more difficult at times.
April 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
deleted
April 5, 2016
Barry Dehlin edited this comment April 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is an adulterated “Rule of 20”, which I suspect you know but to be sure…it's a guideline that suggests opening hands when the combined total of your HCP and the length of your two longest suits are equal to/greater than 20.

http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/Rule20.html

We extend it to “most” 19s. The key is to draw the line…
AKxxx Kxxx x xxx is a clear open.
Jxx Kx QJxx KJxx is a clear pass.
April 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Edited OP to include…
March 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Play whatever your partner wants to play. I suspect the marginal value of any method here (as compared to the others) is so small to warrant very little discussion. Not likely on the list of 100 most important things where you will gain by talking through different options with a partner and weighing the pros/cons of each. It's essential that you and partner know and agree what you play here, but not essential for it to be optimized.
March 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This comment made me realize I had North's hand entered wrong. North held AQ rather than Ax. Now corrected.
Feb. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why do you think we know partner doesn't have solid diamonds?
Feb. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For what it's worth, 1N was implicitly mentioned as an option, because that's the first step to a 3-card limit raise.
Feb. 22, 2016
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My view of partner's “average” hand that would explore slam across from a minimum opener – but also need to cue-bid to eliminate the risk of two quick losers in a suit – is better than what you suggest. More along the lines of a 5-loser hand like Ax xx AKxxx KQJx.
Dec. 23, 2015
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To the vast majority who have provided constructive help, up to and including critical or even disparaging comments on the BIDS…thank you. My partner and I are not experts, and this is exactly the type of expert feedback we can use.

To the minority who have chosen to use the evidence of one hand to make see-how-smart-I-am characterizations of the BIDDERS as novices of whom their teachers should be ashamed…I am less thankful. Merry Christmas to you.

Now, some specific follow-up questions:

1. Re: suggestions that E (me) should rebid 2H. Does not a sequence such as…

1S-2D
2H-(2N or 3C or 3D)
3S

…suggest more than a minimum? IOW, doesn't FAILING to rebid 2S risk being forced to show a stronger hand later in the auction?

2. Re: suggestions that West's 3S bid should not be made on 2 pieces.

I'm assuming folks noticed that E guaranteed 6 for the 2S rebid. Given that, I thought it was pretty standard to raise here on two for many hand types…anything that does NOT have (4 hearts or 6 diamonds or 4 clubs) AND has at least one stopper-less suit making NT unappealing. What am I missing? If 3S guarantees 3, What would you bid over 2S with Ax xxx AKxxx QJx?

3. Re: my 4N bid.

I'm not disputing that it's a bad bid (that opinion seems the overwhelming consensus), but I don't think I fully get WHY yet. With the 4C cue-bid, partner is starting a sequence where (at least in our methods) the only tools we have remaining are cue-bidding for controls, and RKC with it's follow-ups…or said another way, the only tools we have left are those that try to ensure we don't have two quick losers, and/or possible intermediate trump weakness when missing the SQ. So is he not saying that so long as we HAVE all of those things, we should be in slam? If so, what purpose does bidding a diamond or heart controls serve here. My view was that partner is saying that across from my minimum-but-not-awful opener (else I would have bypassed Non-serious 3N to bid 4S), we should be in slam so long as we don't have two quick losers or trump weakness if missing the SQ. Since I know about the SQ and can find out the rest of that by bidding 4N, what purpose does further cue-bidding serve?

So…what's lacking here: (1) something that we should have in our methods that I'm not getting, (2) my thought process, (3) all of that and more?

4. Using mainstream 2/1 agreements, what would the expert standard approach to this hand be, presumably landing in 4S?





Dec. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I haven't read all of this, so apologies if this is a repeat.

I would like to be able to follow a pair through a full matchpoints session on vugraph, with commentary.
Dec. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actual holdings:

……….K753
……….KQ8
……….7
……….A9832
J962…………..AQ8
T6………………..A97432
632……………..Q9
KQJ5…………..64
……….T4
……….J5
……….AKJT854
……….87

Is there any way to insert the handviewer format in a comment?

(Edited to remove 14th & 15th cards from South hand)
Nov. 25, 2015
Barry Dehlin edited this comment Nov. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
While West is inexperienced, East is an experienced Int/Advanced player who actually directs at times and clearly knows about UI.
Nov. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are we worrying a bit too much here? What do we think these probabilities are:

1. Probability that if Polish team had been banned from Chennai that the sponsor would try to withdraw support for Wroclaw.

2. Probability that any existing legal agreements would fail to prevent sponsor from withdrawing support for the Wroclaw championship.

3. Probability that if sponsor succeeds in withdrawing support the Wroclaw championships would not happen.

4. Probability that if Wroclaw championships were canceled that this would somehow threaten “the preservation of bridge.”

I think anyone concerned about this parlay – i.e. that ALL of these things would come true – is overreacting a bit. In my assessment, the risk of all of them coming true is far less concerning than the risk that cheating itself could threaten the preservation of bridge.

Oct. 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
N/S uninterrupted

P 2C
2D 2H (2H is either 5+ hearts or 24+ balanced)
2S 2N (2S relay, 2N 24+ balanced)
3N P
Sept. 23, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top