Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Art Korth
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 70 71 72 73
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with your line.

I also note that 6 is the best slam. I don't have a clue how you would get there bidding with a robot. It is probably quite difficult to get there bidding with a human.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I played Roman Club for some time without illegal information exchange.”

So, you played Roman Club lite?

Just kidding. No offense intended.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, everyone does NOT agree that this board raises a suspicion about fielding a psych. 1NT is good bridge.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Many of the examples cited are for pairings in which one of the teams was vastly superior to the other.

Even then, the odds of winning 16 straight are small.

If the relative odds of Team A beating Team B in a single encounter are 90/10, then the chance that A will win 16 in a row against B is roughly 18.5% (assuming that each encounter is independent of the others, etc.).

On the other hand, what many people seem not to realize is that the chance that a long winning or losing streak will not happen are remote if there are enough trials. So, for example, when a Major League Baseball team wins 10 in a row, some may comment about how unlikely that is. But what is more unlikely is that no Major League Baseball team will win 10 in a row over a sufficiently long period of time. The same can be said about flipping a coin. While it is unlikely that a flipped coin will come up heads 10 times in a row, it is more unlikely that this will never happen given enough trials (and given a fair coin).
Sept. 20
Art Korth edited this comment Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David: I knew that was what you would say as soon as I posted my response.

Charge the known criminal with theft and let the jury decide guilt or innocence. I am looking forward to seeing the defense that is presented.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jumping to 2NT (natural) by a passed hand, whether in an uncontested auction or in response to an overcall, is suicidal.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David: Really?

So, if a Rolls Royce which was on display in the center of a casino suddenly disappears and no one can figure out how it happened, but then a known criminal attempts to sell that same Rolls Royce to a third party, you can't convict that known criminal of the theft until you figure out how he did it?
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cheating in world sports and cheating in bridge seems to go unpunished by the regulatory bodies as a matter of course.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The concept that if you cannot figure out how the cheating is being accomplished that you cannot make a determination that cheating is happening is absurd.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rainer:

I don't believe that we are in disagreement. I like the 1NT bid. It is the jumping to 2NT natural by passed hands (or the equivalent) that I dislike.

This particular hand is a borderline opening bid (some would say a full opening bid). But, having passed, one should be consistent. Don't hang partner who may have opened light.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a preliminary matter, I have not read all of the above responses. But I have my opinion.

Bravo, North!

I have always thought that a jump in NT by a passed hand was the worst bid in bridge. Here, the jump was conventional, but many are advocating the equivalent - some other call followed by 2NT.

1NT is fine (I almost voted perfect, but no bid is perfect). If South has more than a minimum, he should take another call.

North should not be bidding 1NT here just to hear himself talk (or, with bidding boxes, just to use something other than the green card).

Theoretically, the 1NT bid will occasionally result in the partnership missing a good game. But I am still waiting for this to happen. More likely, the 2NT bid (or the equivalent) will result in the partnership getting too high.
Sept. 20
Art Korth edited this comment Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To AW:

The quote from the Koytchou-Ogust system card indicates that they were using a psychic control. Psychic controls may have been legal at the time, but they have been illegal in the ACBL for many years.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard:

Two comments about the linked hand:

1. That is quite a 2 overcall.
2. I don't know what 4NT means having looked at the hand.

I would probably just shoot out 6 at this point of the auction figuring that it was either cold or had play. However, if your side had an agreement that 4NT was RKCB, it might work to your advantage as a tactical bid, as the opps may believe that their A is cashing against 6 and fail to take a profitable sacrifice in 6.

On this hand, it is hard to imagine that diamonds could play better than clubs.
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is inconceivable to me that a hand that could only make a simple overcall can now, after a raise in a competitive auction, make a slam try, whether it is just a try or is RKCB. These explanations make no sense to me. Both partners made bids that can be passed below game. Now we are in a slam going auction?

I would interpret 4NT as a hand with primary clubs and a secondary diamond suit, leaving further action to partner. 5 may be a superior contract to 5, and the fact that I hold diamonds may be important if partner has to make a decision over 5.
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
EDIT: I did not notice that the OP stated that pass followed by 4 was a slam try. As stated by others, it appears that East did not notice this, either. If pass followed by 4 is a slam try, then East MUST bid again.
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East has a better hand than he might have on the auction. But to blame East alone I would have to know more about this pair's requirements for a 2 opening. I can understand East's not moving forward, expecting West to have less in the way of heart support given West's second round pass. There are layouts consistent with the auction where 4 could be in jeopardy. For example, change West's AKx x in the red suits to Ax Kx (or even Axx Kx with one less club).

On the other hand, I don't understand West's pass over 4. So many hands that are consistent with East's 3 call will produce a slam. If West is reluctant to make a unilateral slam move, he should at least bid 4 to clue East in on the fact that he has real heart support.
Aug. 25
Art Korth edited this comment Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes.

There is absolutely no way of knowing which is right. But I would certainly lead either the Q or the 10.
Aug. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East has to lead a club. Not the Ace, although the Ace might be the winner.
Aug. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with you, Dale, but I would go one step further.

Pass should show a balanced minimum NT hand (in context). It is not forcing.

EDIT: By not forcing, I mean that if responder has an absolute zero hand he may pass, but he is expected to keep the bidding open otherwise.
Aug. 24
Art Korth edited this comment Aug. 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 70 71 72 73
.

Bottom Home Top