No! not only for Vul but also for pd.
Do you open 3 clubs?
#21
Posted 2004-November-10, 01:09
My BLOG on bridge game:
bridge blog001:
http://cf71632485.spaces.live.com/blog/cns...!1015.entry
bridge blog002:
http://cvl7163cf2485...st-22291-1.html
"You are not thinking. You are merely being logical". - Neils Bohr
bridge blog001:
http://cf71632485.spaces.live.com/blog/cns...!1015.entry
bridge blog002:
http://cvl7163cf2485...st-22291-1.html
"You are not thinking. You are merely being logical". - Neils Bohr
#22
Posted 2004-November-10, 03:07
Quote
Not that this shows anything, but this time it did indeed make life very difficult for the opponents, who would probably have reached the cold 3NT otherwise.
I like the idea of preempting more often.
I disagree on doing this here , all vuln, but if it works in a pship it's ok, as long as the preempt are consistent.
E.g.: opposite an unpased pard, preempts should ALWAYS be of a given playing strngth, so that pard will have an easier time when he has a good hand (looking for game) or when raising the preempt.
So if you preempt with this hand vuln, you should do it almost all the time (which IMO will cause to be set doubled many times).
Quote
Even if pard raises to 4C, it is hard for E/W to double and find the trump lead on top of it.
Here I have to fully disagree.
West's natural lead vs a doubled 4C is a trump, which is suggested both by the auction AND by West's holding in the sidesuits.
"Bridge is like dance: technique's important but what really matters is not to step on partner's feet !"
#24
Posted 2004-November-10, 12:00
My typical BBO tourney hand. And typically when I finally get to hold a pre-empt in 1st position the vulnerability is wrong - or is it?
May open that 3♣ - depends on the state of the tourney so far. Can't be bothered sitting here boringly passing admiring the opponent's slam bidding.
Now I gave the comment "or is it.." when I suggested the vulnerability was wrong. At this vulnerability I do have one thing in my favour - partner is highly unlikely to sacrifice in 5♣ if the opponents bid 4 of a major. Now, you see, I partner these BBO players and know what they do. So I might be more worried about conceding 800 in 5♣-X when non-vulnerable if I open that collection 3♣. But then non-vulnerable that's a 1NT opening, isn't it?
May open that 3♣ - depends on the state of the tourney so far. Can't be bothered sitting here boringly passing admiring the opponent's slam bidding.
Now I gave the comment "or is it.." when I suggested the vulnerability was wrong. At this vulnerability I do have one thing in my favour - partner is highly unlikely to sacrifice in 5♣ if the opponents bid 4 of a major. Now, you see, I partner these BBO players and know what they do. So I might be more worried about conceding 800 in 5♣-X when non-vulnerable if I open that collection 3♣. But then non-vulnerable that's a 1NT opening, isn't it?
You can't keep a good man down
#25 Guest_Jlall_*
Posted 2004-November-11, 02:41
not even when i was 12 years old and bid for no reason.
#26
Posted 2004-November-11, 07:22
maybe you haven't suffered in BBO tourneys like I have then.
In a recent tourney I had 17 points in my first 4 hands. 4, then 0, then 6 and then finally, wow! a 7-count. Fortunately of the 3 slams the opps bid only one of them made.
By the way, it's lucky that was a free BBO tourney. If I'd paid an entry fee then got those cards I'd have asked for my money back.
In a recent tourney I had 17 points in my first 4 hands. 4, then 0, then 6 and then finally, wow! a 7-count. Fortunately of the 3 slams the opps bid only one of them made.
By the way, it's lucky that was a free BBO tourney. If I'd paid an entry fee then got those cards I'd have asked for my money back.
You can't keep a good man down

Help
