Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Andy Bowles
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 92 93 94 95
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it should be to play, but the traditional meaning is non-forcing with extras.
5 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nigel, perhaps when I replied to your comments I was looking at an earlier version. I see that many of them received edits that were contemporaneous with my replies, and the text appears to be somewhat different to what I remember replying to.

Anyway, leaving aside questions of terminology, if you're going to do this:
- Ask North what his methods are
- Get the same reply as you got from South
- Call the director and ask for a ruling on the basis of misinformation

then you are not “taking Andy's advice”.

Likewise, if you “debate the matter with the opponents”, you are not “taking Andy's advice”.
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, more or less. When you enter, you get an email acknowledging your entry, saying that they're going to contact your NBO to get the NBO's approval, and saying that the WBF reserve the right not to invite you. Later they tell you that you've been accepted (or, I assume, not accepted).
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whatever the rest of us may think of it, this terminology is used by “everyone” in the USA and Canada at least, and has become widely used elsewhere. See, for example, the Bridge World's glossary:

constructive raise
the single raise of a major-suit opening to show more than normal strength (or, sometimes, maximum values for a normal single raise)

limit raise
(1) a raise that invites game
(2) a raise from one to three that shows the range of strength just under that required to force to game


When I voted, I assumed normal North American usage.
13 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff, suppose that I were in this situation:
- It's an important event.
- In the auction, South's explains that 2 shows a constructive, less-than-invitational raise.
- I evaluate the hand as clearly invitational.
- After seeing dummy I ask North about their agreement.
- He replies that it shows a constructive, less-than-invitational raise. He confirms that this is what he intended to show when he bid 2.

No, I wouldn't call the director.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wouldn't employ anyone who drew a distinction between:

an utterance X knew to be false - a “lie”; and

an utterance X knew to be false - “misinformation”.

Perhaps I have misunderstood, but I believe that this is the distinction that Nigel is making.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And, since your English comprehension apparently needs some assistance, there is a difference between what I have just described and merely asking “persistent questions”.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If:
- You ask an opponent a question about what he thinks his methods are.
- You believe that the opponent has correctly understood your question.
- Your opponent answers.
- You call the director and say that you believe that the opponent's answer did not correctly state what he thinks his methods are.

Then yes you are accusing him of lying.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“In Andy's mind, the implication of your persistent questions is that opponents are lying or cheating.”

That is untrue. Please do not attribute to me opinions that I have not expressed.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The BFAME was only formed in 1978. When did Lebanon join the EBL?

Even if there was a choice, the alternative might not have been very attractive from a travel perspective. “Asia and the Middle East” is quite a large area (and the zone was even larger when it included Africa).
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My advice was to ask the question and then accept the answer.

If my plan was to ask the question and then accuse an opponent of lying in his reply, I'd get the director before saying anything.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see anything wrong with East's question or with the answer he got.

If you think you might have received a misexplanation, it's simpler just to ask the opponents and then accept the answer, than to call the director and have him do the same thing.

If you're asked such a question, it's helpful not just to answer regarding the systemic meaning, but also to confirm that you think your actual hand falls within the range for the systemic meaning. If you don't do that, it leaves open the question of whether you knew the systemic meaning when you bid it.

Having asked the question and got an answer, I'm not sure why East would call the director. Is it to complain about the hauteur of the reply?
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Or about any damage.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How does bidding 4 kill the bidding?
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In this case, I think the rules are unambiguous.

From http://www.worldbridge.org/rules-regulations/competitions/conditions-of-contest/

The WBF's General Conditions of Contest are “applicable in all WBF tournaments”. Relevant extracts:

2.33 World Bridge Championship means any event so designated by the WBF from time to time and if the context permits, also means the totality of such events scheduled for play at a particular site.

3.6 Participation in a World Bridge Championship is by WBF invitation only … no player shall be eligible to compete unless his or her name has been submitted in writing by his Zone or NBO to the WBF, for invitation by the WBF

3.9 Pursuant to the By-Laws of the WBF, the President has appointed a Credentials Committee, whose functions shall be (subject to these Conditions):

b) in its discretion, to refuse to invite any player, Captains, Coaches and other Team Officials whose name has been submitted for invitation by an NBO, as aforesaid, to participate in a World Bridge Championship. In any such case of refusal, no reason shall be given by the Credentials Committee.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I do worry about Orlando (WBF Open event).”

There isn't anything to worry about. It's not “open” in the sense that anyone call roll up and play. All contestants have to be invited by the WBF Credentials Committee. For most of us that's a formality, but I can't imagine the WBF inviting Fantoni-Nunes.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not an expert, but my understanding of the various rules is:

1. The EBL. Not the WBF. Not the ACBL. I don't know if any European NBOs have chose to be bound by rulings made by the EBL.

2. Yes. See the rules I quoted here:
https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/would-you-ever-refuse-to-play-a-particular-opponent/?cj=601899#c601899

3. The WBF has sole power to accept or reject entries (technically to invite or not invite players).
The WBF has similar rules to the EBL. Finding them is left as an exercise for the reader.

4. The WBF allow appeals to the CAS. See
http://www.worldbridge.org/the-wbf/by-laws/
sections 8.7 and 8.1
But an appeal to the CAS about a WBF ban would not force the WBF to accept an entry.
Jan. 17
Andy Bowles edited this comment Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Open” is used in the sense of not being restricted by sex or age.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can't simply “enter the European Open Championships”. You submit your team to the EBL, and then the EBL decides whether to invite you.

From the EBL's General Conditions of Contest:

2.5 Invitation to Participate
Participation is subject to nomination by a player’s NBO and
approval/invitation by the EBL.

2.7 Credentials Committee
Pursuant to the By-Laws of the EBL, the Executive Committee has appointed a Credentials Committee, whose functions shall be
(a) to determine all questions relating to the rights and eligibility of players and other team members whose names have been submitted by an NBO for invitation to compete. These names must be transmitted to the President, or his designee, in writing, as prescribed by the relevant SCoC;
(b) at its discretion, to refuse to invite any player or other team member whose name has been submitted for invitation by an NBO, as aforesaid, to participate. In any such case of refusal, no reason shall be given by the Credentials Committee.
Jan. 17
Andy Bowles edited this comment Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I might refuse to play against someone if the Conditions of Contest allowed me to do so. Otherwise I'd obey the rules, or not enter the event in the first place.

(For the purposes of the poll I treated this as a “No”.)
Jan. 16
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 92 93 94 95
.

Bottom Home Top