Comments on: Responding to Blackwood — The Sequel http://oldprofbridge.com/2006/09/12/responding-to-blackwood-the-sequel/ Contract Bridge Themes with a Midwest Accent! Tue, 29 Dec 2009 22:54:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Christopher Monsour http://oldprofbridge.com/2006/09/12/responding-to-blackwood-the-sequel/#comment-132 Christopher Monsour Fri, 08 Dec 2006 11:45:03 +0000 http://oldprofbridge.com/2006/09/12/responding-to-blackwood-the-sequel/#comment-132 I don't know the specific hand that was appealed, but I generally disagree with the notion that the partner who answered kings to 5NT and then raised 6-suit to 7-suit is the partner who bears the blame for the situation. Maybe he would have corrected 7-suit to 7NT, or maybe he was hoping to induce a 7NT call from partner. I would agree with the earlier comment about not bidding Blackwood unless you know what you will do over the response: The partner who bid 5NT should be ready to make his next bid in tempo. Also, " a reasonable delay" in responding to 4NT should mean just that...long enough to make sure you remember what you are playing and don't pull the wrong card. If you take so long that partner suspects you were deciding whether or not a void was useful enough to show and decided against it, that's bad. I don’t know the specific hand that was appealed, but I generally disagree with the notion that the partner who answered kings to 5NT and then raised 6-suit to 7-suit is the partner who bears the blame for the situation. Maybe he would have corrected 7-suit to 7NT, or maybe he was hoping to induce a 7NT call from partner. I would agree with the earlier comment about not bidding Blackwood unless you know what you will do over the response: The partner who bid 5NT should be ready to make his next bid in tempo.

Also, ” a reasonable delay” in responding to 4NT should mean just that…long enough to make sure you remember what you are playing and don’t pull the wrong card. If you take so long that partner suspects you were deciding whether or not a void was useful enough to show and decided against it, that’s bad.

]]>