Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Kit Woolsey
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 383 384 385 386
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael,

If responder had something like your xxx KQJx AKxx Jx, would he have bid 3? He knows he wants to be in 3NT if opener has any spade help – even xxx in spades. It seems to me that with such a hand responder would have bid 3, not 3, putting the entire emphasis on 3NT. Thus, responder's reason for bidding 3 is that he really does have interest in playing in diamonds.

I admit that this isn't totally clear, and these sorts of problems are difficult for any partnership. My point is that responder did bid 3 when he had other options available, so he should have real interest in playing in diamonds as opposed to just showing he has diamond support.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 2NT promises 3-1-5/4

What do you do with:

2-2-5-4
2-2-4-5

Or any of the various 5-5 in the minors hands?
5 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Correct
21 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nothing conventional after that. Just bridge logic. For example, if partner bids 3 (as on the actual hand) you could bid 3 with 2-2-4-5, something else with 3-1-4-5.
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Exactly as Ben describes. Obviously there are downsides to this, but at least partner knows what your minor-suit length is which can be vital on these auctions. It is true that notrump could be wrong-sided, but responder knows that. He is asking about your shape for a reason. If he was concerned about right-siding notrump, he could simply bid 3NT.
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course you aren't forced to rebid 1NT. Rebidding 2 on that hand is fine. If the hand looked more like Kx Qx AJxx Qxxxx you might choose to rebid 1NT. The 2 rebid has a wide range.
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It isn't a question of what signal I would like to be seeing on this particular hand. Partner cannot know what I would like to see. The meaning of his signal is whatever the partnership agreement says is the default signal, and that meaning does not change unless it is totally obvious to both partners that the information from the default signal is either known or of no possible value. That is not the case here.

For most partnerships, the default signal is attitude. Therefore, that is the signal partner gives. If he does something else, or if you interpret his signal as something else, that is an accident waiting to happen.
Oct. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The usual – to play
Oct. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play it is a transfer to next higher suit, could be weak or strong. 3-level bids below 3 are also transfers. 3 is a negative double.
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, my agreement (maybe it is just an agreement with myself) is to never return the second smallest spot card from an original 5-card holding. Partner always seems to find a way to go wrong when you return that spot.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know that. I'm not suggesting it is a particularly great line of play. I'm just pointing out that discarding a diamond is something which could occur to declarer if the hand is played out.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Discarding a diamond on the last club might be not just careless. Suppose East returns a heart, and declarer decides that West has the diamonds guarded and East has 5 spades and the king of hearts. If that is the case, discarding a diamond is the only way to make the hand, via a major-suit squeeze on East.

I'm not suggesting that this line of play is close to correct. I'm merely illustrating that declarer might conceivably choose to discard a diamond if the hand were played out. This shows why bad claims like this cannot be allowed.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, I had missed a spot and thought that partner's lead was known to be from a 4-card suit.

Since partner could have 5 diamonds, then I believe returning the 2 on the actual hand is even clearer. With 5 diamonds, partner will always go right after you return the 2. If you return anything else, partner may wrongly duck.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the key question is: What would you return from an initial holding of Q832. I think the answer is that you should return the 8, since you would know from partner's fourth best lead that you don't want diamonds continued. Given that, the return of the 2 on the actual hand is the best way to convince partner to unblock if he started with AJ9x.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Down 1. It never occurred to declarer that he could recover if the spades were 4-0. He had decided he was going to play AK of spades. He might not have even noticed that East had discarded, since his mental state was clearly that he would play AK of spades.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff is quite right. Players make mistakes, and coincidences do happen.

Once I had some flattish hand with a king and a queen and a 4-card major, partner opened 2NT, and I had to decide whether to bid Stayman. I remembered having the same problem the day before. I checked may scorecard, and sure enough it was the same board number as I had played previously. It looked like somehow the board hadn't been shuffled, so I called the director and told him this privately.

The director properly said to play it out. My facts were all accurate. However, it turned out that nothing was wrong – it was a different hand.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course there has to be some threshold. What that threshold is would have to be judged on a case by case basis. Putting it loosely, the bid in question would have to be a “reasonable” call.

On this deal, if West knows that East has shown spades with his double, bidding 3 certainly rates as a reasonable call.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Opener's double would be takeout? Since when. You are in a force. Unless you are playing some kind of pass/double inversion, opener's double would be penalties. Opener's pass is a normal forcing pass.

If you are playing pass/double inversion where opener's pass requests double and opener's double is takeout (i.e. like a forcing pass), that is a whole new ball game. But you didn't specify that.
Oct. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That doesn't make sense. What would opener do with some 5-4-0-4 hand? He would pass, hoping his partner could bid a major. So, if responder has an offensively oriented hand with a 4-card major, he will bid it. Opener's pass invites responder to do just that. You seem to think it is a command for responder to double.
Oct. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see how the pass then pull concept can apply here. Partner isn't required to double when you pass. Your forcing pass asks him to double with defensive orientation but bid with offensive orientation. He would be entitled to bid 5S on an appropriate hand, and your 1-suiter in hearts would never have been shown. If you have that 1-suiter and choose to not defend, you must bid 5 now.

The pass and pull concept should only apply when you have already established a playable trump suit.
Oct. 16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 383 384 385 386
.

Bottom Home Top