Comments for Blaher on Bridge http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1 A look at bridge hands, bridge players, bidding, declarer player, and defense Thu, 03 Jun 2010 12:49:38 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 Comment on To Save or Not to Save and But I Only Have One Trump For You, Partner by Stephen Harris http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/04/to-save-or-not-to-save-and-but-i-only-have-one-trump-for-you-partner/comment-page-1/#comment-241 Stephen Harris Thu, 03 Jun 2010 12:49:38 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=13#comment-241 In the hand which makes 4 hearts, that game is about 51.7% to make. That means for the contract to make hinges on the quality of your heart suit. If your heart suit is AKT9xx it's a good bid. Are you not allowed to bid 3H on a suit like AK98xx? where you then have about a 45% chance for game. Another way of asking it, would not having the Heart Ten prevented you from bidding 3 Hearts, so that you would have rebid 2 Hearts. Having the Heart ten makes quite a bit of difference. Suppose responder held Jx of Hearts instead of the stiff Queen, the game is till lest than 50% without the HT. You overbid your hand, found partner with an upper range, and could have gotten to a 51.7% game. That doesn't make 3H a good bid. What system are you playing where that hand is worth a 3H call? Not Precision. That is the relevant question, not, well it would have worked. In the hand which makes 4 hearts, that game is about 51.7% to make. That means for the contract to make hinges on the quality of your heart suit. If your heart suit is AKT9xx it’s a good bid. Are you not allowed to bid 3H on a suit like AK98xx? where you then have about a 45% chance for game. Another way of asking it, would not having the Heart Ten prevented you from bidding 3 Hearts, so that you would have rebid 2 Hearts.
Having the Heart ten makes quite a bit of difference. Suppose responder held Jx of Hearts instead of the stiff Queen, the game is till lest than 50% without the HT. You overbid your hand, found partner with an upper range, and could have gotten to a 51.7% game. That doesn’t make 3H a good bid. What system are you playing where that hand is worth a 3H call?
Not Precision. That is the relevant question, not, well it would have worked.

]]> Comment on RKC and Voids and a Simple Declarer Problem by Michael K. Miller http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/12/22/rkc-and-voids-and-a-simple-declarer-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-42 Michael K. Miller Sat, 27 Feb 2010 15:50:56 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=33#comment-42 You're playing the wrong system (smile). NSys™ Precision would dispatch this hand in six bids. The sixth Heart is a bonus, but, of course, you have to play the Heart suit correctly.... >1H (11-14 hcp, 5+ Hearts) >2NT (Suit Quality and Prime Control Asking Bid - Gamma) 4C (Gamma Answer: one of top three Hearts and four or more primary controls) >4H (Heart Ask follow-up: which one?) >4S (Queen) >6NT (There are 2 missing primary controls which is the ace of trumps; therefore partner must hold the KS and AKD. At least 11 tricks are certain: two Clubs, three Diamonds, four Hearts, and two Spades. Six Hearts is the safer contract; however, 6NT will beat those in 6H - and less than half the field will be in 6H, so 6NT will tie for top. In matchpoints, go for 6NT; in team play, go for 6H.) You’re playing the wrong system (smile). NSys™ Precision would dispatch this hand in six bids. The sixth Heart is a bonus, but, of course, you have to play the Heart suit correctly….

>1H (11-14 hcp, 5+ Hearts)
>2NT (Suit Quality and Prime Control Asking Bid – Gamma)
4C (Gamma Answer: one of top three Hearts and four or more primary controls)
>4H (Heart Ask follow-up: which one?)
>4S (Queen)
>6NT (There are 2 missing primary controls which is the ace of trumps; therefore partner must hold the KS and AKD. At least 11 tricks are certain: two Clubs, three Diamonds, four Hearts, and two Spades. Six Hearts is the safer contract; however, 6NT will beat those in 6H – and less than half the field will be in 6H, so 6NT will tie for top. In matchpoints, go for 6NT; in team play, go for 6H.)

]]> Comment on Why Didn’t Everyone Do This? by Jim Huntington http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/14/why-didnt-everyone-do-this/comment-page-1/#comment-18 Jim Huntington Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:25:37 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=20#comment-18 True - at worst you'd need a 2-2 trump break. As much as I think ace-asking conventions are hideously overused, this is a good time for one. True – at worst you’d need a 2-2 trump break. As much as I think ace-asking conventions are hideously overused, this is a good time for one.

]]> Comment on Why Didn’t Everyone Do This? by Mark http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/14/why-didnt-everyone-do-this/comment-page-1/#comment-16 Mark Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:03:34 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=20#comment-16 I meant 4NT Blackwood, but I think anyone reading this would have worked that out :) I meant 4NT Blackwood, but I think anyone reading this would have worked that out :)

]]> Comment on Why Didn’t Everyone Do This? by Mark http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/14/why-didnt-everyone-do-this/comment-page-1/#comment-15 Mark Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:03:08 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=20#comment-15 I guess I thought of the 4th bidding option. Why not 4NT Gerber, which I recommend playing 3014 in minors, for just such an occassion. This way you can find out if partner has an A (either club or spade is really possible) and take out some of the guesswork. I guess I thought of the 4th bidding option. Why not 4NT Gerber, which I recommend playing 3014 in minors, for just such an occassion. This way you can find out if partner has an A (either club or spade is really possible) and take out some of the guesswork.

]]> Comment on Why Didn’t Everyone Do This? by Jim Huntington http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/14/why-didnt-everyone-do-this/comment-page-1/#comment-14 Jim Huntington Mon, 15 Jun 2009 04:23:08 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=20#comment-14 Why is it guaranteed that partner has eight clubs? At this vulnerability, I would open 4C with something like QJ10xxxx and a stiff on the side, and mine is far from the most aggressive style. As one of your most recent problems, a lot, maybe almost all of your decision, hangs on partner's preempting style. Why is it guaranteed that partner has eight clubs? At this vulnerability, I would open 4C with something like QJ10xxxx and a stiff on the side, and mine is far from the most aggressive style. As one of your most recent problems, a lot, maybe almost all of your decision, hangs on partner’s preempting style.

]]> Comment on Welcome by Jim Huntington http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/02/hello-world/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Jim Huntington Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:49:58 +0000 #comment-12 says "2 comments," but can't see them... says “2 comments,” but can’t see them…

]]> Comment on To Save or Not to Save and But I Only Have One Trump For You, Partner by Jim Huntington http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/04/to-save-or-not-to-save-and-but-i-only-have-one-trump-for-you-partner/comment-page-1/#comment-11 Jim Huntington Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:48:28 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=13#comment-11 On the second hand, I'm with you. You could bid 3NT anyway (I think that would be better than passing), but when one partner has a long, strong suit, stiff queen-or-higher support is as good as two small. Another common blind spot - people not assessing the quality of the partnership's trumps as well as the quantity. On the second hand, I’m with you. You could bid 3NT anyway (I think that would be better than passing), but when one partner has a long, strong suit, stiff queen-or-higher support is as good as two small. Another common blind spot – people not assessing the quality of the partnership’s trumps as well as the quantity.

]]> Comment on To Save or Not to Save and But I Only Have One Trump For You, Partner by Jim Huntington http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/04/to-save-or-not-to-save-and-but-i-only-have-one-trump-for-you-partner/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Jim Huntington Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:44:55 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=13#comment-10 The principle is to get the opponents to make the last guess. With this hand opposite a partner who preempts soundly (as his 3C call certainly was), we think it's very likely they can make 5 of a major, but we don't know about six. So you bid 6C right away and let them guess. Don't give them room to communicate, only room to guess. I personally think 5C is way too weak (though as we know, half of the Orlando club would do the same), and opposite some partners, i.e. those who preempt white-on-red like I do, I'd actually bid 7C, feeling secure they could make a small slam. The principle is to get the opponents to make the last guess. With this hand opposite a partner who preempts soundly (as his 3C call certainly was), we think it’s very likely they can make 5 of a major, but we don’t know about six. So you bid 6C right away and let them guess. Don’t give them room to communicate, only room to guess. I personally think 5C is way too weak (though as we know, half of the Orlando club would do the same), and opposite some partners, i.e. those who preempt white-on-red like I do, I’d actually bid 7C, feeling secure they could make a small slam.

]]> Comment on Some General Musings by Jim Huntington http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/2009/06/06/some-general-musings/comment-page-1/#comment-9 Jim Huntington Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:38:30 +0000 http://grandslamdbc.com/blog1/?p=16#comment-9 And as for your concern about having "9 HCP," why aren't you using loser count for raises? I suspect that with six diamonds your hand got to the 8 you should have, regardless of the atrociously overemphasized HCPs. And as for your concern about having “9 HCP,” why aren’t you using loser count for raises? I suspect that with six diamonds your hand got to the 8 you should have, regardless of the atrociously overemphasized HCPs.

]]>