Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Art Korth
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 68 69 70 71
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A partial answer to your questions.

Here is a link to the WBF “Drop-in Rules” page:

http://championships.worldbridge.org/orlandows18/drop-in-rules

Quoting from that page:

**Note that players entering the Pairs Championships after playing in the Teams Championships (i.e. whether they are eliminated at the end of the qualification or whether they drop in after being disqualified during the Knock out phase) do not do so free of charge. They must pay the normal entry fee for the Pairs event.

However, there is a Post Rosenblum teams, which consists of two one-day Swiss Teams and these events are free of charge to players from the Rosenblum; the one day Post-McConnell and Rand events are also free of charge to players from the McConnell and Rand Teams respectively.
9 hours ago
Art Korth edited this comment 9 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Here is the practical description of the difference between a “tactical bid” and a “psych:”

If I make the bid, it is a tactical bid.

If my opponent makes the bid, it is a psych.
10 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe it is called monogamy.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sabrina:

I don't disagree with what you are saying. And if the COC state that the masterpoint total on the computer run for the month preceding the event controls, then it controls. If you have 2499 as of the June computer run and 2501 in the July computer run, and the event is run in July, then you should be eligible to play in the event.

I suppose that the ACBL is interpreting the language as meaning the computer run immediately preceding the event, not the one from the month prior. But that is not what it says (or, at least, that is what you say that it says - I did not review the COC).

Having said that, I cannot help but to comment about the elephant in the room. Why are you playing in this event if you have more than 2500 masterpoints?
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Point 2 is a BIG jump from point 1. And it has nothing to do with the legality of psyching.

John, we disagree. In my opinion, psychs are legal. Period. But if the partner of the player who psyched has more reason to believe that his partner may have psyched than the opponents, he has an obligation to disclose that fact to the opponents. Such knowledge comes from experience WITH THIS PARTNER, not general bridge knowledge. So, if the auction goes 2 - x - 2, there is no need for the 2 bidder to alert and announce that the 2 bid may be a psych unless he has seen his partner do this previously. The fact that this type of psych is well known does not make it a partnership agreement, nor does it mean that the 2 bidder has more reason to believe it is a psych than either of the opponents.

The obligation to disclose is part of the general principle of full disclosure. It has nothing to do with psychs, per se.
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why do you need to know? He knows. If he needs to tell you, he can cue bid again.
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pyschs are legal. There is nothing conditional about that.

Law 40.C.1. states that the partner of the player who deviated from his side's announced partnership agreements (i.e, he psyched) can not have any more reason to know about the deviation than the opponents. This is not a condition on the legality of a psych. This is a condition of full disclosure. If the partner of the player who psyched has any reason to know this, there is an implied partnership agreement. Failure to disclose this agreement is subject to penalties.

Law 40.B.2.a.v. permits the Regulating Authority to restrict the use of psychs of artificial calls. This implies that the Regulating Authority has no right to restrict the use of psychs of any other calls.
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The players may confuse the two situations, but the TD and the recorder should not confuse the two situations.
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From my system notes:

After a cue bid is doubled (other than splinter bid auctions):

Redouble by responder is first round control.

Pass by responder is second round control.

A bid by responder denies a control in the suit doubled. A bid of any suit other than the trump suit is a cue bid, and a reversion to trump suit is the weakest call available.

After a pass, redouble by cuebidder is first round control. A new cuebid by cuebidder shows only second round control in the doubled suit. A reversion to the trump suit is the weakest bid available. (Pass shows a desire for a new partner)
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is this really a problem? I can't remember the last time an opponent psyched against me.
July 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am just saying that winning masterpoints, regardless of the game percentage, is a qualification.

I found the qualification rules in the NAP Conditions of Contest:

From Club Stage

Eligible partnerships qualify by finishing in the top 50% of their field (rounded up and including ties) plus any pair with at least a 50.00% score not in the top half of their field. New partnerships between club stage qualifiers may be formed at the unit stage. Only paid-up ACBL members and Life Masters whose service fees are paid prior to the unit stage may participate beyond the club level.

So the top 50% of the field calculated by number of pairs in the field and any pair ranked lower that has a matchpoint score of 50% or more qualifies for the next level. Masterpoints won have nothing to do with it, but since any pair that wins masterpoints has to be in the top 50% of the field calculated by number of pairs in the field, they will qualify.
July 16
Art Korth edited this comment July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You never know. And it takes 50% unless the qualifications standards have changed.

Winning masterpoints also works. In the B and C strats, I supposed you can win masterpoints with an under 50% game. But that is rare in the A strat.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought that partner would not have as much strength as he did, so the (presumed) 5-3 heart fit might face some difficulties, especially if the hearts did not break. I thought that getting to play the hand would be good enough.

On this hand, I was wrong. Everything was tranquil, and the 5-3 heart fit played just fine. Moreover, the opps did not have any place to play the hand.

In the larger picture, I knew that we were going to qualify, and I didn't want to take any positions. As it was, we won easily even with only a 33% score on this board.
July 16
Art Korth edited this comment July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, Ray, I did miss a third option.

Is everything in life a poll?

___ Yes

___ No

___ Other

:)
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ray: Not everything in life is a poll.

Or, maybe I should post this poll:

Is everything in life a poll?

___ Yes

___ No

If you ever listen to the Dan LeBatard show on ESPN Radio you might think that everything in life is a poll.
July 16
Art Korth edited this comment July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. He did not. In fact, our side got a poor result for both playing in clubs rather than hearts and by not bidding game.

I could post my hand as a bidding problem, but it really doesn't merit it. I held AQ9 Axx xxx Txxx and chose to play in clubs rather than hearts. Partner had 5-5 and a pretty good hand - better than I expected to see.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The partnership has to determine how many controls responder must show in his initial response for the partnership to be forced to 4NT. I play control responses in one partnership. We have agreed that a 4 control response forces the partnership to 4NT, but that anything less does not.

So, if the partnership in the OP were following this agreement, the 2 control response would not be forcing to 4NT.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If, after a positive response, the partnership is forced to 4NT, then it is easy to agree hearts - bid 4. It is forcing.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The thought that anyone would bid a non forcing 3 with either of the hands suggested by RS makes me physically ill.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 red on white?

Too rich for me.
July 12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 68 69 70 71
.

Bottom Home Top