Lovera

Thanks, how i have said there is a certain number of times you can see your played hands but i have ended it and now i cannot see anymore. Effectly it is the same result.

After a certain initial number you cannot see again the hands played if you don't pay..whilest the complete ranking is always accessible.

After my post n. 64 here, when i was playing on application the same day, it was suggest to me {some random external site} that is initially free. Because bboskill.com is blocked do you know a skill search totally free, thanks.

..but it must consider that improving own play in this way is not easy(=productive) because probably needs a (collateral) study.

At the beginning of last year when i was playing, i tried to calcolate my skill level. After a pause of monthes i have reprised to play and actually in about a week i have played round 60 hands but skill level doesn't sign to improve number of hands played :however ? It should be not in real time ? Why does not change the number of hands played ? Thanks, bye.

Where wereagles finds "va-et-vien droit" ? This is a terminology of B. Romanet. If you think to squeeze 'cause club 4 is the case of double squeeze : to have major informations probably we must recurr to a reciprocal indifferent (B.R. def.) in this way. Spade J, unblocking hearts, spade Ace, cash remainig hearts returning diamonds tops and leading King spade too and both opp are squeezed. It doing so is covered also Qx in diamond.(Lovera)

When you have lacking two tricks think or a progressive squeeze or dummy reversal (that has one hidden trick) + a simple squeeze.(Lovera)

To attribute a positive sign for X needs think that there is a gain : such as vul vs not vul and both contracts fail down.

This rule (LTC x 5) is not mine but i have found it in a book of G. Barbone ("Il libro completo del bridge") as i have already said in another post. I have taken only the variation for longness that allows to use it more frequently (en passant i use Stayman system).

I increase 2♣ bidding in this way: you valutes the hand with LTC and moltiply for 5 this number. If MW points + only longness (1 point from 5th card and so on) is more of number of losers x 5 you can open with 2♣. But you can consider also shortness ulheriorly and not only longness that should take at 18(Usually with 4 losers we must have almost 20 points(=pair) to open.) In this way is more delimited space for reverse but i suggest to retain 2♦ If partner has not more of 1,5 controlls (3 kings or 1A +KQ in other suit),.(Lovera)

Here (media 7) meaning should be that opp have each 7 points but i think it is correct for usual hands and not for hands like those that required 2♣ bidding because this high concentration of points takes an analogue concentration of points in the hand of an opp. So standing the things i suggest this : it calculate 2/3 of remaining points in an opp and rest in the other (1/3=50% of 2/3) and this one should be compatibile with "symmethria law" by Easly Blackwood, bye.

Ruffing two diamonds it should be the possibility to have a repeat squeeze with a delayed play in hearts running all trumps.

..or better 5♣=King, 5♦=? Q, 5♥=no Q. But with 1NT range of force is 5-8 points (media 7) and to get grand with this hand i need only 5 points then where are remaining ones ? With 5NT probably bidding ends in 6♥=no King aside but i can obtain the same resulting with 6♦ for 6NT=Q or 7♥=King.

Infact. By your partner have (almost) 13 points to add with a very good heart suit with all top cards in getting at 5th level.

After ♣ A, all trumps discarting all diamonds then 9 for ♥ K, top clubs pitching Q5 of diamonds ..(Lovera)

The nosittej (and/or also entry) squeeze should came from twin entry squeeze (Axx/Kx) minus a card in suit that is to say Ax/K and is a 0-loser squeeze acting at 11th trick.

Bidding about X as "informative contre" is not simple : in this case (1♦) probably GIB considers suit having 4/+ cards. Raising diamond with AQ opposite an eventually Kxxx it may be if equivalent four cards of support. Indications in box about cards and points are not much correct.

Because GIB has a strong hand : with only a club it'd have bidden 2♣. Answering X with this hand and 3 points it's just 1♦ but range of force is 0-5. 2♠ it'd be correct with this hand : ♠ AQJxx ♥ K10xx ♦ Ax ♣ xx whilest with all these points in the others suits GIB overcalls with 2♣.

The nosittej is also known as entry squeeze : it serves to solve comucation problems. Terence Reese analyzed these endings togheter winkle and steppingstone : W ♠ - ♥ Qx ♦ - ♣ AQ in N ♠ x ♥ AJ ♦ - ♣ x in E ♠ - ♥ - ♦ xx ♣ xx in S ♠ A ♥ K ♦ - ♣ Kx (stepp. sq.), bye.

(13) North ♠ A ♥ J ♦ - ♣ - East not infl. South ♠ KJ ♥ - ♦ - ♣ 9 West ♠ Q10 ♥ A ♦ - ♣ - South leads the nine of clubs and West is squeezed. If West discards the ace of hearts , North lets go of nine of diamonds, and North's ace of spades and jack of hearts win the last two tricks. If West discards a spade, North jettison the ace of spades, and South king-jack of spade makes two tricks. This positional simple squeeze is called a jettison squeeze. Now, let us swap North's ace and South's king of spade [..with the same diagram].. This squeeze is the natural reverse of the jettison squeeze. We may call it a "nosittej squeeze". Moreover, this nosittej squeeze is automatic: If the East and West hands are interchanged, East will be squeezed. (From "The SQUEEZE at Bridge by Chien-Hwa Wang pagg. 38 and 39) (Note: The situation in diagrams (13) and (14) were first published in "The British Bridge World, December 1956).(Lovera)

No. This is not just way to start an argoument that may be deep but not irrisolveable. How have already said in " Double squeeze tecnique .."(see in "Find my content" the approach of C. E. Love is on my advice correct fourthemore the lonely that i have seen because all the other authors starting with schemes (Chien Wa Wang) and also Romanet that has same pattern of Love (menace orientation) that get what you have said (man type of squeeze) without no gain. The solution is on another side,bye.

This is another way for "correcting the count". Let's say you have to execute a squeeze against East having ♠ J controlled by Queen and ♣ AK7/Q843 with 4th club controlled by J1092. It being 5 cards in East you can apply "rule of 14". So 14-5=9 but if you have only 8 winner in your hands but may lose a trick for opp you simply increase your count so getting to 9=8 winners more 1 loser ..making sure that no return lead can hurt you..9) Correcting the count...Then, you must "rectify the count" by losing as many tricks as may be necessary : with two losers in hand, duck (that is, purposely lose) one trick; with three losers duck twice; etc.(From "Bridge squeeze complete or winning hand play strategy" pag. 24 and example hand from Exercise 7)[The rule of 14 is a my ultherior suggest].

Sull'applicazione clicca su "My BBO"e poi sulla pagina successiva su "Recent Hands" restando registrate le ultime 100 partite.(Lovera)

But with a suit like this compact and without losers i know that is non good to make a barrage (also against partner) because we can avoid a possible 3NT or how in this case a slam making difficultose bidding.

A double squeeze that i have played like hibryde retaining comucating in clubs too instead of twin entry lonely in diamonds (ruffing a club)(Lovera)