Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Avon Wilsmore
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All deals, and many more, will be presented in detail at another time.

Meanwhile, I confess not to understanding this “equal-level conversion”.

Take P1, Q8:
8643 10 AK63 AQ98

After the given, P 1 X, suppose the auction goes like this:

P 1 X 2
3 P ?

What do the ELC advocates recommend?
Dec. 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Terence Reese, British Bridge World, Sep, 1956:

“It was only recently that I learned of an interesting experiment made in the final of this year's Italian team-of-four championship. A screen was placed diagonally across the table so that each player could see one of his opponents but not his partner.”

The screens were then known as Franco Boards, having been devised by Mario Franco, Bermuda Bowl finalist, 1951.
Dec. 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am waiting for a reply from Simon Fellus, WBF Secretary, on just that question (the vacating of titles).

It's only been a few months…
Dec. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hand 1 (passing) occurred two years after hand 2 (raising).
Dec. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No,the response in a three-card suit was described as a psyche.

My mistake.
Dec. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Quite correct… fixed.

Thanks.
Dec. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just to clarify:

As declarer, I lead A from hand; the first card of a new trick. Dummy has hearts. After LHO plays, I say, “Small.”

Is this a “Proper Form for Designating Dummy’s Card”?
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From neapolitanclub.altervista.org :

“On 15th November, 2017 the German Bridge Federation (DBV- Deutsche Bridge Verband) has posted the verdict issued by the Court of Düsseldorf:
The sanctions by the German Bridge Federation and the World Bridge Federation to Elinescu and Wladowhe are invalid…”

Now we see something similar in Turkey.

Clearly, all jurisdictions, big and small, must tighten up their legislation.

I have no doubt at all that the WBF will shortly release their own new legislation, along with clear and comprehensive guidelines for all NCBOS, thereby ensuring that we can deal, fairly and openly, once and for all, with cheats in our midst.

In other news, high-level officials are now confident of long-term peace in the Middle East…
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree 100%

Until I spent time in the US, I had never once heard “Play”, as an instruction from declarer.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the 1965 R-S affair interests you, Kleinman's essay is essential reading, in my opinion.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hand One:
Their winners are five clubs, two spades and the ace of hearts. A heart lead provides the ninth trick.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, one board was a part-score battle, the other was much more about defense and dummy-play. Great article.

The following year, IIRC, there was a related BRP article in Bridge World - we followed the previous year's winners, board-by-board.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tell me, Michael, is this a moose, for a three-level intervention?

1 P 2 ?

K 7 5 A A Q 10 3 2 J 9 5 2

1 was 5CM Standard, the event was one year after the event described above.

You are vul vs not.

Dec. 11, 2017
Avon Wilsmore edited this comment Dec. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tomorrow's article has two opening lead problems.
Dec. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Opening leads? Only one more sleep to go.
Dec. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It may well be an excellent agreement, but it is not one that N-S had.
Dec. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is true that 9 tricks were the limit.
Dec. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The double of 3any was plain takeout, by their system notes.
Dec. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“… expert players in 1955 had all learned bridge before the Work point count became widely popular. Any hand with three honor tricks was considered an automatic opening bid”

Reese was the expert's expert, truly one of the greatest of bridge intellects. In Play Bridge With Reese“ he writes about an opening bid made by a rubber bridge partner (from memory):
”It would not occur to me to open that hand as dealer, vulnerable. For far too many players nowadays, life is bounded by the number of points they hold….“

The hand was one that would not pass comment now; a flat 12 with a couple of aces.

”Also, in 1955, a jump preference in a minor was forcing to game. “

R-S did not live in America. I have no doubt that the vast majority of English Acol players played it not-forcing in 1955, 1965 and 1975.

”Truscott's case ultimately unpersuasive…

For a brilliant analysis of R-S at the 1965 Bowl, see Danny Kleiman's “Bridge Internationals, Famous and Infamous”.

I think Kleinman is a markedly superior analyst to Truscott, and 20 pages of Kleinman is worth more than Truscott's whole book (with the exception of the Gerber Evidence from 1960)

Kleinman ends:
“I find Reese’s Story of an Accusation to be a masterpiece of deception, containing erroneous representations of
vulnerability conditions on at least two boards, many unsubstantiated characterizations of bids as “normal” when they aren’t, unnecessarily vague language, and frequent non-sequiturs.”
Dec. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Why You Lose at Bridge”, S J Simon.
Dec. 9, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top