Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Avon Wilsmore
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Barking mad” is standard UK/AU/NZ English.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What prevents East from winning trick one and thinking, “If and when a heart is ducked to my honour, what will I do and why?”
May 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit Woolsey:
“I have said this many times. When presenting a problem, give ALL the information exactly, bid by bid and card by card.”

So where is the real KW and what has this faux author done with him? You won't get away with this!
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am the author of a 4-segment system devised in 1982, used for a few years and then resurrected for a successful tilt at the 1998 Australian Playoff.

Pass: 17+ any or 8-12 flat, no 4CM
1: 13-16 any
1: 0-7 any
1/: 4+M canape, 8-12
1NT: 5-4+ majors or minors, 8-12
2: 6+, or 5+ and 5+M, 8-12
2: 6+ no major, or 5 and 5+M, 8-12
2: 4 and 6+ or 4 and 6+, 8-12
2: 6+ and 4H or 6 and 4, 8-12

GF relays were used; these were more efficient and simpler than Symmetric. Indeed, I have succeeded in teaching the relay structure to non-bridgeplayers in about 15 mins.

I haven't played it since 1998 and don;t have much interest in debating its merits.
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that I do not understand the original posting. We are told that our leads are “2nd/4th highest”

What does that mean?

Suppose we are on lead and determine that spades is the right suit to lead. We hold K102.

What card do we lead, with these “2nd/4th highest” methods?
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lead: two of diamonds.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did not say that the problem initially given occurred in 1971.

Instead, I am asserting that there have been some pairs with a long-term and successful ability to bid with bad hands when partner had goodies and to pass with good hands when partner had rubbish.

I have compiled quite a collection of these deals.

I will be discussing them, in detail, at a later date.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My comment wasn't about patience, either.

I will spell it out:
At the table, the player concerned passed.

That is why the poll asks (in effect), would you pass or would you bid?

All I wanted was to see the ratio of passers to bidders.

After referring to page three of the following article, I leave it to you to guess what values partner had.

http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/more-weirdness-from-the-1971-bowl/
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 shows some high cards. South should have doubled.

1 shows some high cards. North should have doubled.

West is a hand-hog; if he wants to act, double is clear.
May 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, there is a very good reason.

The same reason I posted this:
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2-oei3y3ny3w/

And this:
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2-adpngkgbzz/

And this:
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2-q9nxxbduu6/

Anyway, patience, friends, I will be able to Disclose All soon.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are not too many vul against not psyches to be found.

I know of only one in WC play and partner fielded it perfectly.
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't understand any of this.

Second player plays low, third player plays high, right?
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, corrected.

Ramsey's expos√© of Reese's coup was in the following issue's “You Say…”
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, the Pass that Ramsey rewards is quite peculiar.

Yours is a better construct.
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, the awards are assigned to one call chosen at one point in a particular auction.
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In 1957, a big European pairs event was scored electronically and participants had a personal recap sheet handed the them at the end of every session.

I've heard a rumor that this will be replicated in America any decade now, but don't hold your breath.
April 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're fired!
April 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you want video evidence and *proof* of cheating, contact Donna Compton.

http://www.pbb-webinars.com/behindthescenesgerman.html
April 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
JP: You think you have grounds for complaint? Haw! Try this one:

The Australian Bridge Federation made such a f-up of the carry-over for the 1998 Playoffs for the Australian team that they *cancelled the match and ordered a new Playoff*

See page 8 of this article for details:
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/on-the-actions-of-administrators/
April 24
.

Bottom Home Top