Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Barry Margolin
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 59 60 61 62
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I see, you were suggesting that we should partner with running organizations rather than (or in addition to) ALZ.

As I see it, this is NOT a marketing or recruitment activity, it's a community service, which happens to align well with the needs of the bridge-playing community. IMHO, asking “What are they doing for us” is outrageous. It's like giving to NPR just for the tote bag.

If it creates more bridge players, that's gravy.
19 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What about them? Are people only allowed to have one recreational activity? Does anyone think there's only one way to possibly stave off dementia?

It's not a zero-sum game, it's not “us vs. them”.

We want to encourage ALZ to find out what people can do to fight against the disease. We expect that bridge will be one of the recommended activities, and they'll promote it. I don't think anyone expects them to endorse our game as the only recommendation, it's not like a newspaper editorial column having to pick one candidate to endorse.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All the strong club players I know describe their 1-level openings as something like 11-15. They never say “less than 16”, and I would consider that an inapproprate description. If I actually heard it I would probably ask because of the unusually wide range. But if someone said “less than 7”, I'd probably expect that it means 0-6, since a 6-point range for a bid is not so unusual (if the top of the range is only 6, it's hardly surprising that it goes so low).

I'm also not crazy about people saying “less than X” or “more than X”. Mathematically, that shouldn't include X (a mathematician would say “less than or equal to X”). But notice that you seem to have included X, since you described 0-7 as equivalent to “less than 7”. I haven't actually encountered this type of description much, either. People usually use “less than” when describing a hand qualitatively rather than quantitatively, as in “less than an opening hand” .
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me, “less than X” means from 0 to X-1, unless the player has already shown a lower limit. If the meaning of the bid is a range, I expect them to say “X to Y”.

Have you ever asked that question when someone describes the weak response to a strong opening?
March 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the “public education and awareness” includes suggesting that people take up intellectual activities like bridge, that 73% could align well with ACBL's mission.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know if NBB has similar rules, but in ACBL you're supposed to pre-alert “very light style”, and I think a weak 2 with only 5 cards and 2 HCP probably falls into that category.

But some here have suggested that it's not so unusual where Multi is common. If this isn't considered “very light” in the Netherlands, then there's no infraction.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lots of businesses do community service, encourage their employees to do community service (by giving them time off for it), and donate to charities.

Often these activities have little direct relationship to the business's core activities. It's because the management understands that businesses are members of the community, and giving back is a way to be a good community member. There's more to running a business than just the bottom line. For instance, I used to work at Akamai, and they sponsored an annual community work day in honor of one of the founders, who was on one of the 9/11 planes that crashed into the WTC.

And in this case, there actually is some relationship between the charity and ACBL's mission to support bridge and bridge players. And unless ACBL is in serious danger of bankruptcy, I don't see why it shouldn't do some good for the world at large.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I hope you're trying to point out the possible link between bridge and reducing Alzheimer's, not that we should care less about Alzheimer's because it doesn't afflict us as much as everyone else.

BTW, correlation is not necessarily causation. Maybe people who are predisposed against Alzheimer's are also predisposed towards mind sports.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Alzheimer's is a serious problem that affects the minds of (primarily) old people.

Bridge is a mind sport, and the vast majority of players are old people.

Is it so hard to see that something that benefits Alzheimer's research benefits the bridge community? Why do we have to insist on a more concrete quid pro quo?

If the Alzheimer's Association does things that promotes bridge, all the better. But I think there's plenty of justification for working together without such a promise.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you allow for the possibility of such “bluff and double bluff” systems, you lose the ability to rule on what these types of UI “demonstrably suggests”.

It's also probably a violation of 73D2:
A player may not attempt to mislead an opponent by means of a question, remark or gesture; by the haste or hesitancy of a call or play (as in hesitating before playing a singleton); by the manner in which a call or play is made; or by any purposeful deviation from correct procedure (see also Law 73E2).
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sounds like someone is trying to unseat you as “worst bidder in the club”.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't?
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Correlation does not automatically imply causation.

If there were multiple tables with similar UI, and all of them doubled, you'd have a more reasonable argument for causation. It's hard to make a case from just one outlier, it could just be a coincidence.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why do people think West's question suggests values? If he had values and heard that South was weak, wouldn't he have bid something or doubled (he's obviously short in hearts)?

Asking a question doesn't specifically suggest values, it suggests that your action depends on the answer, i.e. you would have done something different if you'd received a different answer. So if he passed over a weak 2, it means he might have bid something over an intermediate or strong bid.

Considering the way the auction progressed, with North and South both showing decent hands, the UI suggests that West was considering a preempt over a strong hand. How does this suggest that East should double the final contract?

In actual fact West doesn't have a hand that warrants any question. But that's irrelevant to the UI laws.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In UI cases, what the player actually thought is often irrelevant. Law 16 is framed in terms of hypothetical players of similar ability playing the same system, and what actions they would consider and choose.

That's why statements like “I was always going to X” are not adequate defense. It doesn't matter whether they actually took advantage of the UI, just whether what they did is the same as what someone who took advantage of the UI would do.
March 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A partner who couldn't bid more than 1 over the double suddenly has enough for a slam try? Did he just find some aces that fell on the floor?
March 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If he has 6+ hearts, is there really any LA to playing in hearts? LAs don't change just because he misbid. He's not forced to stop looking at his hand.
March 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I'm not paying you for lessons, I'm paying you to help me win.”

While they may not say it overtly like that, that's probably often what's going through the client's mind. And the pros almost certainly know which of their clients have attitudes like that.
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
First of all, 30 years ago transfers were alerted; this was long before announcements were invented. But I guess your question is really whether you were supposed to explain that he could be showing hearts.

Unless these false transfers were a regular occurrence, I don't think you could be expected to explain it proactively. But you admit that your reason for passing when he pulled 3NT was because of your experience with his tendencies, and that probably should have been disclosed. I don't remember whether the alert regulations 30 years ago required alerting bids above 3NT, though.

OTOH, it's kind of hard to imagine any other meaning for the 4 bid. How could a partner who merely invited game now be making a slam try?
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The OP seems to have East and West mixed up.
March 12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 59 60 61 62
.

Bottom Home Top