Timeline for In bridge, does it make sense to "tighten" or 'loosen" up on bidding depending on vulnerability?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 2, 2013 at 18:03 | comment | added | Tom Au | If I understand your response, the answer would be yes. | |
| Feb 2, 2013 at 17:45 | comment | added | Tim Lymington | @Tom: now I'm really confused. If your partnership agreement is to open borderline hands green but not red (perfectly normal though it should probably be declared at duplicate), then your other hand is a perfect example: is that really what you are asking? | |
| Feb 2, 2013 at 17:39 | comment | added | Tom Au | I meant, suppose you AND partner have an agreement to open "light" at favorable vulnerability, and pass some 13 pointers when vulnerable vs. not. | |
| Feb 2, 2013 at 17:37 | comment | added | Tim Lymington | @Tom: As ever, it depends on many things. But you should also consider that if you open a weak hand (or pass a 13-pointer) this time, your partner is less able to trust you next time. | |
| Feb 2, 2013 at 17:35 | history | edited | Tim Lymington | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
tidier
|
| Feb 2, 2013 at 17:22 | comment | added | Tom Au | Interesting response. What is your answer to this question? boardgames.stackexchange.com/questions/8308/… | |
| Feb 2, 2013 at 17:10 | history | answered | Tim Lymington | CC BY-SA 3.0 |