New answers tagged

1

People have answered about the Duke of Cumberland hand you found as an example (and if you looked up Fleming's text, you would find a complete play. I just confirmed with my copy). In general, it's a lot like recipe books for chefs, as opposed to recipe books for duffers like me. Instead of a detailed list of ingredients and thorough preparation steps, ...


4

This is a (very old fashioned) extreme example, but many systems are designed at least in part to hide information from the defenders. Bids on the left, explanations on the right: 1NT-2D; 12-14 Balanced - Artificial game force 2NT-3C; No 4 card major or 5 card minor - show your shape 3H-4S; exactly 3 spades, 2 hearts, 4=4 in the minors (key!) - to play pass ...


3

Yes, it is a requirement that each partnership's agreements, both in Bidding and Play, must be available to the other side. However, by my estimate somewhere between 5 and 10% of all non-trivial calls by each side require judgement between two (or more) possibilities. These decisions are often the topic of long, occasionally even heated, discussion with ...


4

Yes, you're right - there is no secret information shared by your partner but not with opponents, beyond the difference in ability of the two partnerships at deciphering the information. When I say "One Heart", everyone at the table knows that I have 12-21 points and 5 or more hearts. Bridge isn't Poker, or any other similar game, where hiding ...


0

In addition to the other two great answers here, I'll expand a bit more on the "why". Basically, your goal is to describe your hand as low as possible and as accurately as possible, right? So you want to show partner whether you have 4 hearts or 5 hearts at the earliest moment possible, while showing other details about your hand too. If you play ...


1

Because a 3-4-3-3 hand is much more suited to a Notrump than a Heart contract. A 2H call must perforce deny 4 cards in any of Clubs, Diamonds, or Spades (unless it is a hand believed to be much stronger than Opener's, which lies outside the scope of this Question and Answer), so if holding only 4 Hearts must be the contract killing four-triple-three. To ...


2

The short answer: because it's just a good idea. Expanding a bit: One of the primary goals of bidding is to find the best game available. In no trump, game is 9 tricks. In a major suit, it takes 10. In a minor suit, it takes 11 tricks. When you find a good trump fit (8 cards or more in the trump suit), you can usually take about one additional trick with ...


8

Is it ethical? Sure, and it's done all the time (for real bridge reasons, see Joe's answer). It is not required to help declarer when it won't help partner. What's not ethical is telling the opponents your signalling method, and then having it not be. "We play standard carding" is not the same as "we agreed standard carding but since my ...


20

Playing cards in such a way as to not accurately reflect your hand is perfectly fine - as long as that's actually what you're doing. There are plenty of hands where you're on defense and you know that partner is pretty much worthless; you're defending 3NT, partner knows your long suit, and you have 14 points anyway and expect partner to be in the lead ...


5

I expect a lot of this is due to the players not knowing what they, or their opponents, are playing. I don't know if the other players are bots or human, but if bots, the bidding is odd. The SAYC book doesn't talk about balancing much, but it does say about direct overcalls: "Overcalls show 8–16 points (double and bid the long suit with a stronger hand)...


2

This is a combination of two things: poor bidding and pretty much worst case distribution, which sometimes is just impossible to deal with in a good way. West's opening is totally fine, of course; 5-5-2-1 distribution and 10 HCP in the long suits is a fine opening bid. North's pass is a little shaky, but at Vul-Vul it's probably okay; NV it seems like an ...


Top 50 recent answers are included