mikl_plkcc

What is ET?

I got into bridge when I was in high school, and I had a regular partner at that time. However, my partner didn't get good enough result in the GCSE to enter matriculation. Also, I was in the national high school programming team at that moment and playing bridge was the most common form of entertainment by then. I continued playing bridge into university, at the university bridge club, but I no longer have a fixed partner by then, until one year after graduation when I left my job as a research assistant at university, as my interest in sports had shifted into orienteering, and then marathon swimming. The university bridge club had open competitions which were held on a weekend, similar to the high school competitions. This is not too different to any other sports. In bridge, 4 players form a table, and get a deck of cards then you can practice.

It is extremely easy to miss a game if I pass (partner can have as many as 12 points), so I will double.

I play 1NT response as good 6-9. Is it good?

I open the higher with equal length in the long suits, which is 1♥ in this case.

I think it is stupid not using 2NT-3NT as natural. If partner opens 2NT, most frequently you want to play in 3NT.

West has underestimated his strength. It seems like 17+ with 3 As, a supported K and also a singleton. Base HCPs: 16 Good points: - 3 As - K supported with A - no Qs - values in the majors - singleton Bad point: - unsupported J (but not really bad since it is in a 5-card suit)

I don't fill safe bidding any number of NT. If East gains the lead, he will immediately lead a diamond if he has one, and West will run all 6 ♦s in his hand immediately. X is not an option either, as there is an unbid doubleton. The only sensible action to me is 2♦, pretending that I have 6 ♦s.

I'm not going to try Bridge Captain soon because: It is not free software. Therefore, it is not included in my free operating system. However, I have only used a few features in tenace, mainly the double-dummy solver, including the par contract. However, it doesn't seem to be scriptable so the things it can do is very limited, going against the UNIX philosophy.

I simply won't make a free bid without enough points.

I use a software called "tenace" to read the .lin files downloaded and analyse them.

As North, I would not open, waiting for the opponents to bid a red suit and use a two-suiter overcall. If, in this case and the opponents do not bid, the bidding may go: / - 2♣ (traditional) 2♦ (two-suiters do not make positive rebid) - 3♦ (real suit and real opening) 4♣ (now is the trouble) - 4♦ (I'm single suited) 4♠ (My bidding system is defective) - 4NT (I have a heart stopper, let's play here) 6NT (Considering you have 2♣ strength, I think 6NT is playable) - // Then, the contract fails. However, if 2♣ can be freak, the bidding would still be the same since only single-suited freak hands are opened 2♣. If North opens and plays weak jump shift: 1♣ - 1♦ (playing WJS 2♦, 3♦ are all weak) 2♠ (forcing to game) - 7♦ // (oh s**t) Then, the contract fails when the ♠K is off If North does not open and East preempts with 3♥, / - (3♥) - 5♦ - (5♥) (LoTT) / (oh s**t) - (/) - X - (/) / - (//) (no one dare to bid) Then, a slam is missed I cannot find a good method to bid these hands and don't bother finding one.

South has a marginal hand, all the others are not good openings. (I would upgrade South to 12 due to concentrated values in major suits)

Bidding double is horrible as the overcall strongly suggests ♠ void. I would show my 3-card support instead, hoping they dare not double us.

1♣？ 你的1♣是什麼意思？

♠8964 ♥AK47 ♦Q24 ♣Q5 第三家你会开叫吗？1♦、1♥还是1♠？第四家呢？ N.B. 请不要忘记6×4年前发生的事！

Please dump this treatment. Your situation has demonstrated where the problem exactly lies.

I would use them to show 5-5 in the minors and shortness in the bid major, with slam interest.

4♣ = 10 4♦ = 7 3NT = 1 / = 0 Passing this hand is ridiculous. You need 5 top tricks. You have only 1 and you need 4 from your partner. With a little distribution from either opponent, 3♥x is rock solid unless partner holds all aces, which is seldom possible. 3NT is also bad unless your partner has 8 top tricks and stoppers in every other suits. Otherwise, if there are any tiny holes in your partner's hand, once they knock out the ♥ stopper, 4 or 5 sure tricks are coming. Therefore, I bid a minor.

That means you open this 1♠?! ♠AQJ9753 ♥Q9765 ♦7 ♣- I would rather not open this, hoping an opponent opens a minor than use a Michaels cuebid.

It is supposed to be random.

I suspect that "bridge 4" is flawed because I never gets a hand which is less than 10 HCPs.

In the original natural bidding system, all opening bids, except preemptive bids, require some sort of defensive strength. But today's players seem to open whenever the point count and the shape are correct, and disregard the defensive requirements. Personally, I think that some of the rules, e.g. a 2NT opening requires all suits stopped, are useful. However, I sometimes see players opening 1NT with two unstopped suits, opening 2NT with a singleton K, opening 1-level bids with quacky 12 HCPs, opening 2-level preemptive bids at the 1st seat with 6 small cards and a void, etc. Do you still make bids according to the strict traditional criteria?

A traditional 2♣ opening is forcing to 3 of a major, unless the sequence is 2♣ - 2♦ - 2NT, which can be passed. A traditional suit response requires about 8 points and a good suit. I think this is good enough for slam investigation. I encountered a case holding ♠AJxx and partner responding 2♠, then I could immediately know that the suit was solid, and bid 4NT for aces. Here are the pros and cons of various systems: Traditional The good point is the ability of finding the partner's good suit if any, the bad point is that the 2♦ waiting response shows nothing about the strength except not having a good suit to bid, and the inability to stop at the 2-level holding absolutely nothing. 2♥ immediate negative The good point is the ability to stop at 2♠ immediately when holding absolutely nothing, the bad point is losing the natural 2♥ response. cheapest minor negative I can't think of any good points of this because the time responder showing absolutely nothing, the auction is already at the 3-level. HCPs responses The good point is the ability of knowing the combined HCPs of the partnership, which is helpful for deciding how many NT to go, the bad point is that the HCP count is mostly useless in a suit contract. controls responses The good point is knowing how much As and Ks in the partnership immediately, which is helpful for whether to go for a slam, the bad point is that the Qs and Js are ignored, which, if responder has little values, makes deciding whether to go game or not difficult.

I think this is a standard balancing double.