Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Avon Wilsmore
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You challenged Mr Herrmann to find a reasonable line for 9 tricks and he did so.

We should be saying, “Well done!”.
Aug. 20, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are no misconceptions in the article. You need to read Solution 1 from the article again.

Also, I endorse Mr Burn's tip - read Expert Bridge Simplified“. Very worthwhile.

To claify:
Suppose West ALWAYS leads a longest and 4th highest 2-spot against your 3NT contract. You know that East therefore has a doubleton. Vacant places (11:9) does NOT apply.

The error you have made is in your first sentence:
”If SOME suit breaks 5-3…“.

This is not ”some suit“ since W always leads 4ths.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem:

”Phillip Martin's article in a 1989 issue of Bridge Today magazine titled “The Monty Hall Trap” (Martin 1989) presented Selvin's problem as an example of what Martin calls the probability trap of treating non-random information as if it were random, and relates this to concepts in the game of bridge."
Aug. 20, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are the misconceptions in the article?
Aug. 19, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good to hear you did the right thing. People who self-adjudicate at the table just make matters worse.

And you are right, some players are amazingly obtuse:

I once psyched after my partner's pre-empt and played 3H in a 2-2 fit with next-to-nothing in high cards. At pairs, favourable vul, I faced my hand and said, “Nine off”.

“Play it out!”, LHO barked.
Aug. 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Please play it out” is in violation of:

Law 68 D. Play Ceases
After any claim or concession, play ceases (but see Law 70d3). if the claim or concession is agreed, Law 69 applies; if it is doubted by any player (dummy included), the director must be summoned immediately and Law 70 applies. No action may be taken pending the director’s arrival
Aug. 18, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dean:
Beautiful satire! Sir Humphrey Appleby would be proud of you…
Aug. 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On the one hand you say:
“There are so many other marvelous, intelligent, well-intended, provocative, authoritative contributors who prevail on other super, educational SITES (my emphasis) you will enjoy!”

Then comes:
“I was not referring anyone to another site”

You write:
“It certainly seems clear to me that Bridge Winners has fallen from grace…”

Then comes:
“And, by the way, it is not the site I am trashing!”

You ask that Bridge Winners “institute (and demand) a requirement of civility and mutual respect…and not worry so much about your alleged “freedom of speech” obligation.”

So you are wishing the staff of BW to violate the constitution of the USA on the grounds that some comments displease you.

And strange that you make a “demand” “of civility and mutual respect”.

From your very own blog:
”I.. stopped reading your unending diatribe… Your blathering… Get a life!“

”…(You) type away as if your brain and fingers were under the influence of a compelling laxative."

So you advocate a policy for BW that is quite the opposite of what you yourself do. Interesting.
Aug. 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't see the point of asking a forum to determine the nature of a call using methods that the people know nothing about.

No one is going to say, “After playing this method for some years I have found…”
Aug. 16, 2013
Avon Wilsmore edited this comment Aug. 17, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And a thank-you to Mr Burn for clarifying the concept of “equity” as it applies to claims. Useful to have this properly defined.
Aug. 16, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mr Burn is quite right. A player who cannot count to 4 does not get to do any counting later on. Therefore, no squeezes.

What he can do is play big cards and put little ones on the big ones. On the current deal that means one down. Declarer did not have 4 diamond tricks when he said he did and he doesn't get gifted 4 diamond tricks later.

The director's line: “good deal of respect to West's declarer-playing abilities”, is one of the silliest red-herrings I have ever seen. The committee ruling was misguided at best.

Those who have trouble with this should consult the best director they can find and see what he has to say.
Aug. 16, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Don't rush him! Give him time! He'll find the CapsLock key eventually. We'll know when he does…
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Take, for example:
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-2167/

At the current time, 40% like X, 52% like Pass.

I much prefer X, but if I had a teammate who prefers to pass I would let the matter go with no discussion.

Mr Cem is on the right track:
Ten clones of me who were polled would all say that Pass is a LA, but none of me would do it at the table.
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For the those unfamiliar:
http://www.duluthpoker.com/cheat-at-poker/mechanics-grip/
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Quite so. If you can't count to 4 properly, you live with the consequences.

TD, committee members and East should all line up for a good kick in the Khyber.
Aug. 15, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And use some of the funds for a white-board and cattle-prod to educate the TD and committee…
Aug. 14, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very cute and well-done.
Aug. 14, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Recent history tells us that players bid vul games on next-to-nothing, relying on reasoning that ignores being doubled.

So, if N cannot raise then this is going down.

If this is a BIT “issue” I regard X as clearcut but would cheerfully accept any ruling to the contrary.
Aug. 14, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand. Owe WHAT to their clients? An abdication of ethics and integrity?

First Mr Donn tells us about “an expert player” with the ethics of a tapeworm, now we have clients who want to be in on the resultant dirty work? Please.
Aug. 14, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are some sick people in this world.

Keep filling out those forms!
Aug. 14, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The question you ask about “how antipercentage” is a good one.

I think (independently of any replies you get from BW) you should buttonhole the best director you can find and go over the matter with him.

What you want is a specialist in bridge law; what you will get from BW is commentary from a range of players, from expert down.

Or, maybe write to David Stevenson: http://blakjak.org/#bas_menu
Aug. 14, 2013
.

Bottom Home Top