1
Interesting Play Hands / Re: I LOVE this system!
« on: January 27, 2018, 10:07:19 AM »
That's fine to love your baby. But in this case some one else baked it.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
That's fine to love your baby. But in this case some one else baked it.
2
Interesting Play Hands / Re: I LOVE this system!
« on: January 23, 2018, 10:23:19 AM »
I'm not sure its really system Oliver. The opponents have 24 HCP points and 9 hearts and are likely to bid at most tables? Its nice yours didn't. As a check I put the hands into Jack and redealt a number of times (10, true not enough to make a statistician cheerful, but its time consuming to do more) only remixing EW cards. Not once was the contract left in 1S, either West bid or East balanced.
I doubt that any sensible North would bid on that hand even if a blow torch was put on them, and especially with the S singleton ... that's just 'asking' for a spade rebid by partner. Even worse if opener bids hearts at some stage The only bid I might consider on the North hand, if a system allowed it would be a pre-emptive 3C over 1S.
IMO its not system getting NS overboard to 3S (and game !), its very poor bridge sense. Most openers would be anticipating a 2S rebid over whatever North bids. If North passes, what is so great about the South hand? Why would other Souths consider going higher than 2S even in competition? Even my Jack programme set on its most aggressive settings doesn't consider that sort of action when playing 5M's.
Oliver, no need to state my ideas are radically different again, you have emphasised that in most replies and I know it now.
I doubt that any sensible North would bid on that hand even if a blow torch was put on them, and especially with the S singleton ... that's just 'asking' for a spade rebid by partner. Even worse if opener bids hearts at some stage
The only bid I might consider on the North hand, if a system allowed it would be a pre-emptive 3C over 1S.IMO its not system getting NS overboard to 3S (and game !), its very poor bridge sense. Most openers would be anticipating a 2S rebid over whatever North bids. If North passes, what is so great about the South hand? Why would other Souths consider going higher than 2S even in competition? Even my Jack programme set on its most aggressive settings doesn't consider that sort of action when playing 5M's.
Oliver, no need to state my ideas are radically different again, you have emphasised that in most replies and I know it now.
3
Bidding Challenges / Re: How would OCP bid this 5-5 Major with 18 HCP's (Maybe 16HCP's)
« on: October 28, 2017, 08:17:11 AM »
Jimmy. It looks like you are playing a natural system(?), so I think a 1S opening is optimal for me too. Or did your partner bid 2H over a positive response to a strong 1C? A 2S rebid still seems better than 2H to me. John has a nice, clean sequence that we would all aim to reproduce.
4
Interesting Play Hands / Re: A Tricky Trump Split
« on: October 18, 2017, 10:59:05 AM »
I'm voiced my opinion before on bidding with North's type of hand and dislike Oliver's approach. It's his system so if I played with him or standard OCP I'd have to stick with that. In my experience it pays to get active and to try and play the contract at the 1 or 2 level. To pass on that North hand just gives up the battle.
Recently I purchased a quality article on bidding over weak and strong NT's with DONT. I wanted to compare the action with the methods I play locally. I'm a bit staggered on the weak hands opponents now days are prepared to bid on over a 15-17 NT. Hands that I wouldn't have previously considered over a weak opening. It's not exactly the same but if they are prepared to bid just to grab the contract or disturb the 1NT opening, then I'm willing to support partner more than OCP recommends when we open with 11-15 bid to exert more pressure at the table. Like Brian and Georgi, I think, on balance a more liberal responding approach brings in a higher share of positive boards. If the point spread between the two sides is even or close to it, as the 15 + 7 is here, then I don't want to announce weakness and allow them a lead directing or easier balancing bid. 11 + 7 is fine for me too. Fewer pairs now days have doubles that can catch you for a penalty at the two level. For me this penalty loss swings the balance in being more active as responder.
To contrast I remember the Roth-Stone Systems', keep standards up policy; supported by liberal balancing back in. IMO they got shut out of auctions too often. To me one of the main advantages of limited openings is that responder can bid freely knowing that opener very rarely will make an embarrassing response. In standard one needs to sometimes make a bid on junky values with the fear of game or GF bids from opener. But North's hand here isn't junk. Its worth one bid.
Likewise Oliver's point about bidding an outside 4 card suit with 6M is debatable IMO too. With say 6 spades I would rather have 1S - 1NT, 2S than 1S - 1NT, 2C/2D giving the opponents an easier ride. Also it means the openers rebid is likely to be at least 3+ if the M is only 5 cards. That's more comfortable and certainly better than say Acolities bear, who are sometimes required to bid 1S -1NT, 2S on 5 cards. Although its true the only 6 cards are known compared to 8 with say 1S - 1NT, 2D on balance I would rather know that opener is 6+ rather than 5 with an outside 3+ suit.
Recently I purchased a quality article on bidding over weak and strong NT's with DONT. I wanted to compare the action with the methods I play locally. I'm a bit staggered on the weak hands opponents now days are prepared to bid on over a 15-17 NT. Hands that I wouldn't have previously considered over a weak opening. It's not exactly the same but if they are prepared to bid just to grab the contract or disturb the 1NT opening, then I'm willing to support partner more than OCP recommends when we open with 11-15 bid to exert more pressure at the table. Like Brian and Georgi, I think, on balance a more liberal responding approach brings in a higher share of positive boards. If the point spread between the two sides is even or close to it, as the 15 + 7 is here, then I don't want to announce weakness and allow them a lead directing or easier balancing bid. 11 + 7 is fine for me too. Fewer pairs now days have doubles that can catch you for a penalty at the two level. For me this penalty loss swings the balance in being more active as responder.
To contrast I remember the Roth-Stone Systems', keep standards up policy; supported by liberal balancing back in. IMO they got shut out of auctions too often. To me one of the main advantages of limited openings is that responder can bid freely knowing that opener very rarely will make an embarrassing response. In standard one needs to sometimes make a bid on junky values with the fear of game or GF bids from opener. But North's hand here isn't junk. Its worth one bid.
Likewise Oliver's point about bidding an outside 4 card suit with 6M is debatable IMO too. With say 6 spades I would rather have 1S - 1NT, 2S than 1S - 1NT, 2C/2D giving the opponents an easier ride. Also it means the openers rebid is likely to be at least 3+ if the M is only 5 cards. That's more comfortable and certainly better than say Acolities bear, who are sometimes required to bid 1S -1NT, 2S on 5 cards. Although its true the only 6 cards are known compared to 8 with say 1S - 1NT, 2D on balance I would rather know that opener is 6+ rather than 5 with an outside 3+ suit.
5
Bidding Challenges / Re: Importance of Hand Evaluation
« on: September 21, 2017, 02:50:32 AM »
Open 1H and allow opponents to push you to 5L, perhaps slam level if partner doesn't bid. I'm fearful of the master suit so don't want to announce too much shape and weakness early on least it aids the opponents more than partner. I'd also consider 4H or whatever a heart pre-empt is in OCP. Game may be on for both NS and EW and will assume unless I hear otherwise that the balance of points are evenly spread between the other three hands. The developing auction might show otherwise.
1C is out for me as partner may later consider a penalty double expecting a trick or two from my hand. 2H wouldn't satisfy me in a tournament as I may then consider bidding and rebidding D's to stay in the auction. Announcing a weak 2-suiter hand with that extreme pattern probably isn't going to help our cause much and I'd rather conceal my D holding. Yes, unscientific I suppose but I can come to life if partner explores, and give no revealing distributional information to opponents should they quickly dominate the auction.
Pass for me is also very unattractive as it's likely to give them an easy ride. If partner takes stronger auction over 1H, my hand has playing shape, except for the potential miss-fit.
I've got a feeling most other pairs will make some sort of opening bid so here I'll go with the field and the bid that gives me most hope in defense or offense. On balance I think it's best to have first say here and see where the auction takes us. One thing for sure there is going to more action at the table so I'm not yet going to think too much ahead than that.
1C is out for me as partner may later consider a penalty double expecting a trick or two from my hand. 2H wouldn't satisfy me in a tournament as I may then consider bidding and rebidding D's to stay in the auction. Announcing a weak 2-suiter hand with that extreme pattern probably isn't going to help our cause much and I'd rather conceal my D holding. Yes, unscientific I suppose but I can come to life if partner explores, and give no revealing distributional information to opponents should they quickly dominate the auction.
Pass for me is also very unattractive as it's likely to give them an easy ride. If partner takes stronger auction over 1H, my hand has playing shape, except for the potential miss-fit.
I've got a feeling most other pairs will make some sort of opening bid so here I'll go with the field and the bid that gives me most hope in defense or offense. On balance I think it's best to have first say here and see where the auction takes us. One thing for sure there is going to more action at the table so I'm not yet going to think too much ahead than that.
7
Interesting Play Hands / Re: What's the Best Line?
« on: August 11, 2017, 01:24:24 AM »
Oliver, your line is fine to me but I would eat the herring. 
To me the key is the timing of the Diamond entries removal. The hand is dead to us both unless the spade finesse works? So it does! The AD is access to the table but give them the opportunity to lead it ... and they most likely will? And they would expect any line that doesn't knock out the diamond hold as normal so the play in another suit would appear reasonable to most defenders. For that reason I don't think the initial club play is as revealing as you say and especially to the defender who holds the KH. So I will duck the first club for a potential extra club trick. The immediate duck doesn't give too much away; less than delayed and extra count information, if not more. The duck is my best opportunity to make them guess.
OK, then they don't lead diamonds as hoped but a heart. Now its time to win the diamond. I'm in a similar position to one plan in needing the hook to work. For that sequence when the hook wins you have no opportunity to duck in clubs so at least 9 tricks. If clubs are 3-3 all along, my sequence is at least 10 tricks at little cost? I think many defenders would knock out the AD against the risk of opening the heart suit after the initial duck short of any other clues.
BTW, I think Eszter's line is very dangerous. "At trick 2 she played Ace, King and a 3rd Club".
If clubs following are 4-2 the two tricks are immediately lost AND the other defender has had a chance to direct the defence with his signal. Now besides the spade play there is little hope of an extra crumb. The play of A then KC deserves a 5-1 break and now the defences focus now is also on hearts.
Oliver says "As you say, Brian, the potential advantage of Ace, King and another Club is if West wins the 3rd Club and the Clubs are no worse than 4-2. West ended up thinking Declarer had the
King and felt they could do no better than to take the 
finesse for you "
After two clubs, they would hopefully not be worse than 4-2 but to any decent defenders, the order of the last two clubs played by EW will likely give information about other suits for the defenders. In effect one defender could say to or not to lead spades. The blind lead of the QS is just that, blind. So bad I would not have considered that possibility in my planning. As well Eszter's play of the top two clubs gives up all control of the suit, and some flexibility that might be required later in the hand. IMO a poorer play. I'd like some crumbs with my herring, please.
That was a nightmare look ahead. My opponent didn't lead hearts and instead knocked out the AD as hoped. My post is like one of those horrible films where the scenes jump all over the place. Back to reality.
We play on, but the finesse loses. Damm. OK, lets hope the 8D was a short lead ... doubleton it has to be, so it is, at least we still have the extra chance that the club duck gave us for the 9th trick. Did we survive?
At the worst a third diamond is lead, but doesn't that also break any other sequence? I think I've covered most of my bases without giving the opponents information that might have reduced their guesses. At least they do have a guess, that might have been my only real hope in the end.
What. The defender lead the 8D from 4 small. Thank goodness I didn't cash those top clubs. Thank you for the 5-1 break. Thank you Herring, Justice at last. Now I need the KH to be well placed. So it is! Surely after all those setbacks something is OK.
No its off too. What a mess, 27 HCP, no game, two undertricks. Partner cheerful as usual observes, another other pair made it with the same lead. Bloody Herring.
In summary IMO this hand is about good planning and counting. Combining chances. Timing. Making assumptions that will allow you to succeed if all other plans are likely to fail. Sometimes an early play in a key suit before the opponents know what is happening may give them more problems. Giving the opponents as little information as is possible. If all else is equal, at least give them plays that allow them a guess
I'm guilty of not reading all the other replies. I see now most of my opinions have already been voiced in earlier posts.
To me the key is the timing of the Diamond entries removal. The hand is dead to us both unless the spade finesse works? So it does! The AD is access to the table but give them the opportunity to lead it ... and they most likely will? And they would expect any line that doesn't knock out the diamond hold as normal so the play in another suit would appear reasonable to most defenders. For that reason I don't think the initial club play is as revealing as you say and especially to the defender who holds the KH. So I will duck the first club for a potential extra club trick. The immediate duck doesn't give too much away; less than delayed and extra count information, if not more. The duck is my best opportunity to make them guess.
OK, then they don't lead diamonds as hoped but a heart. Now its time to win the diamond. I'm in a similar position to one plan in needing the hook to work. For that sequence when the hook wins you have no opportunity to duck in clubs so at least 9 tricks. If clubs are 3-3 all along, my sequence is at least 10 tricks at little cost? I think many defenders would knock out the AD against the risk of opening the heart suit after the initial duck short of any other clues.
BTW, I think Eszter's line is very dangerous. "At trick 2 she played Ace, King and a 3rd Club".
If clubs following are 4-2 the two tricks are immediately lost AND the other defender has had a chance to direct the defence with his signal. Now besides the spade play there is little hope of an extra crumb. The play of A then KC deserves a 5-1 break and now the defences focus now is also on hearts.
Oliver says "As you say, Brian, the potential advantage of Ace, King and another Club is if West wins the 3rd Club and the Clubs are no worse than 4-2. West ended up thinking Declarer had the
King and felt they could do no better than to take the finesse for you " After two clubs, they would hopefully not be worse than 4-2 but to any decent defenders, the order of the last two clubs played by EW will likely give information about other suits for the defenders. In effect one defender could say to or not to lead spades. The blind lead of the QS is just that, blind. So bad I would not have considered that possibility in my planning. As well Eszter's play of the top two clubs gives up all control of the suit, and some flexibility that might be required later in the hand. IMO a poorer play. I'd like some crumbs with my herring, please.
That was a nightmare look ahead. My opponent didn't lead hearts and instead knocked out the AD as hoped. My post is like one of those horrible films where the scenes jump all over the place. Back to reality.
We play on, but the finesse loses. Damm. OK, lets hope the 8D was a short lead ... doubleton it has to be, so it is, at least we still have the extra chance that the club duck gave us for the 9th trick. Did we survive?
At the worst a third diamond is lead, but doesn't that also break any other sequence? I think I've covered most of my bases without giving the opponents information that might have reduced their guesses. At least they do have a guess, that might have been my only real hope in the end.
What. The defender lead the 8D from 4 small. Thank goodness I didn't cash those top clubs. Thank you for the 5-1 break. Thank you Herring, Justice at last. Now I need the KH to be well placed. So it is! Surely after all those setbacks something is OK.
No its off too. What a mess, 27 HCP, no game, two undertricks. Partner cheerful as usual observes, another other pair made it with the same lead. Bloody Herring.
In summary IMO this hand is about good planning and counting. Combining chances. Timing. Making assumptions that will allow you to succeed if all other plans are likely to fail. Sometimes an early play in a key suit before the opponents know what is happening may give them more problems. Giving the opponents as little information as is possible. If all else is equal, at least give them plays that allow them a guess
I'm guilty of not reading all the other replies. I see now most of my opinions have already been voiced in earlier posts.
8
Interesting Play Hands / Re: Pet Hates!
« on: August 10, 2017, 11:08:13 AM »
I agree about the speed issue. I ask them if they expect to play without any thought at all.
For the system query, I asked the opponents if I could ask my partner, still being fairly new to bbo methods and knowing one could never do it at f2f. One of them declined! The other was understanding. Is it OK in a game to ask partner what his bid means or what agreement we would have (say action over a weak NT)?
For the system query, I asked the opponents if I could ask my partner, still being fairly new to bbo methods and knowing one could never do it at f2f. One of them declined! The other was understanding. Is it OK in a game to ask partner what his bid means or what agreement we would have (say action over a weak NT)?
9
Interesting Play Hands / Re: Pet Hates!
« on: August 10, 2017, 04:13:45 AM »
Its a touchy matter and sometimes we err without any intent. I remember playing against an Oamaru pair sometime ago and the outcome of the contract was pretty clear to everyone at the table but me. The easy clue if I remember correctly was that West held one of the key cards as he bid and I somehow missed it. Someone said 'just claim' but I didn't realise the win was there. Instead I played for a simple squeeze and started isolating a menace instead of taking the alternative immediate finesse. To my embarrassment it was commented how I was 'correctly' playing the hand so I stopped my squeeze preparation as the comment gave that key card away. Then someone asked why I didn't continue with the squeeze. Well there was no pleasure in that anymore. I just claimed and didn't reply to that question.
My pet hate is where people just leave a table without a thanks, reason or bye. I just blacklist them and now my list is long. But I discovered recently that the listing doesn't work the way I expected. It doesn't stop them sitting at a table again, even if you 'own' it, but only the ability to chat/email with you. Its even more rude to try and now boot them off so I put up with returners now.
My second hate is where opponents will not allow one to ask a new, perhaps one-off partner, what convention they play (say 3041, 4130) or the meaning of an ambiguous bid e.g. 1H 4C. In one case I was left to play against a senior pair in a (friendly?) team match and guess my way through while they had an encyclopediac range of conventions, treatments and understandings to assist them. At the time it gave me a fair amount of pleasure to trash them but no satisfaction on reflection now.
My pet hate is where people just leave a table without a thanks, reason or bye. I just blacklist them and now my list is long. But I discovered recently that the listing doesn't work the way I expected. It doesn't stop them sitting at a table again, even if you 'own' it, but only the ability to chat/email with you. Its even more rude to try and now boot them off so I put up with returners now.
My second hate is where opponents will not allow one to ask a new, perhaps one-off partner, what convention they play (say 3041, 4130) or the meaning of an ambiguous bid e.g. 1H 4C. In one case I was left to play against a senior pair in a (friendly?) team match and guess my way through while they had an encyclopediac range of conventions, treatments and understandings to assist them. At the time it gave me a fair amount of pleasure to trash them but no satisfaction on reflection now.
10
Interesting Play Hands / Re: Pet Hates!
« on: August 10, 2017, 03:31:33 AM »
I've never noticed that. Why would he think for that time when he doesn't even hold them and doesn't want the heart lead? More often I find they are mystified by artificial bids, dally too long or and quickly leave the table.
11
Interesting Play Hands / Re: What's the Best Line?
« on: August 10, 2017, 03:29:37 AM »
Hello all. I would have ducked the first small club and not touched diamonds. Let them lead D's and then take C hook.
12
Interesting Play Hands / Re: Recommended play?
« on: August 05, 2017, 08:51:32 AM »
I agree. To me it was a problem about thinking about thinking.
13
Interesting Play Hands / Recommended play?
« on: August 05, 2017, 08:22:36 AM »
This hand is from the intermediate level in Bridge Master. South is in 6S with the JH lead. No indication if its MP or IMP scoring. Nil vul. No bidding from EW. East overtakes with AH and leads KD.
North:
S 432
H 43
D 5432
C 654
South:
S AKQJT
H KQ
D A
C AKQ32
What is your plan?
.
.
.
.
.
.
I go down because I don't see anything better than drawing trumps and hoping for an even break in clubs.
The recommended line is to play 2 rounds of clubs before drawing the last trump. At first I thought, why risk a club ruff by not drawing trumps? What a nice play when I rethink about it.
Now I have to think why my brain didn't allow me to consider the play. The contract is always safe if both follow to two clubs. If one opponent is out on second club, then the only hope is that they don't have the outstanding trump. I was aware of a possible uneven club break but my thinking put the trump in the shorter hand when it need not be, and could not be if the hand is to be made. Nice.
What was your plan?
North:
S 432
H 43
D 5432
C 654
South:
S AKQJT
H KQ
D A
C AKQ32
What is your plan?
.
.
.
.
.
.
I go down because I don't see anything better than drawing trumps and hoping for an even break in clubs.
The recommended line is to play 2 rounds of clubs before drawing the last trump. At first I thought, why risk a club ruff by not drawing trumps? What a nice play when I rethink about it.
Now I have to think why my brain didn't allow me to consider the play. The contract is always safe if both follow to two clubs. If one opponent is out on second club, then the only hope is that they don't have the outstanding trump. I was aware of a possible uneven club break but my thinking put the trump in the shorter hand when it need not be, and could not be if the hand is to be made. Nice.
What was your plan?
14
Interesting Play Hands / Re: Love "all indications E has Heart guard" EDITED
« on: June 20, 2017, 01:18:07 AM »
Oliver, YEP, real bad typos on my part. In the published hand East did in fact only have kqx.
Correct suits in attached pbn. My many entry errors ruined the hand more than just a bit. Trying to cover two different scenarios made the entry too problem-some for me. The actual 'red herrings', .... alternative plays could've come later.
If the play instead reveals East has the hearts then squeeze fails if 9C run around to South.
I wonder if anyone else in our group wants to study or practice squeezes? I know Marty started some time ago. I don't mean me teaching them as I'm learning them my-self and many are a mystery to me.
Correct suits in attached pbn. My many entry errors ruined the hand more than just a bit. Trying to cover two different scenarios made the entry too problem-some for me. The actual 'red herrings', .... alternative plays could've come later.
If the play instead reveals East has the hearts then squeeze fails if 9C run around to South.
I wonder if anyone else in our group wants to study or practice squeezes? I know Marty started some time ago. I don't mean me teaching them as I'm learning them my-self and many are a mystery to me.
15
Interesting Play Hands / Re: Love "all indications E has Heart guard" EDITED
« on: June 20, 2017, 12:37:12 AM »LOL, struggling to cope mentally with you continually moving the goalposts here: East has already shown up withKQ73, I think, if I've followed your somewhat unintuitive play diagram correctly (East played the Q
Admittedly, if East did start off with KQ73 exactly, they know that Partner started with Jxxx after the 2nd round of the suit (when South ruffs), so there's no problem for them to discard the 3
Yes and my reply in .
East in fact has
Blast, yet another error in my recall of hands ...
'2H' discarded by East was meant to be 2C. Typo. Blast.
So East has just KQx, not the JH.
What's the point of my trying to cope with
Pages: [1] 2