Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Barry Rigal
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As an aside: If you were missing KQ108 leading the 9 from dummy to East's 8 should see you put in the jack I think.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree the basic point of pass denying control and xx promising a control so you are back where you belong. I'm fairly sure it was a Gold Cup Final c1991 against Forrester/Robson where we didn't have that agreement and it cost a game swing.
They had bid a suit, I bid KC with an open suit (not that one) and they got the x in and we still bid slam but they cashed their two tricks. And yes they would have gone away if they hadn't led the suit.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That was my instinctive reaction too. For bonus points we should consider J7643 facing K1052 but I'm not up for it this late at night. I'd guess low to the king again.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I learned from scratch the easy 97.5% of the system in 15 minutes. The last 2.5% took a few months and I often got them wrong later.
Alan Truscott taught me and explained that this would be the case!
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Symmetric is briefly written up in my book Precision in the 90s.
The focus is on a relatively simple Precision, then there is a bells and whistles section. the appendix sets out Symmetric in a summary form.
Alan Truscott taught me Symmetric in 1994 when I came to NYC. I passed this to Steve Green in 1995; he passed it on to Rob Helle, who taught Bauke and Simon on the Dutch team. So they owe me 2 world championships.
For anyone wanting details the options are to buy the book or get me to send the details – I think I have them on file somewhere…
June 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know whether standard CRASH includes Suction at the two-level but that is my preference.
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
15 second analysis:

With J10x on lead our play may not matter but covering clearly looks best.
With J10xx we want to duck. We can knock out SA and if we then find the HA where we want it we may survive.
With Jx we may need to work out which defender has both missing aces.

That seems to make it a toss-up?
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For some reason on BBO I find an extra ace in my hand at the start of the auction that vanishes by round two…so far my guardian angel has been working overtime and saved me from what I deserved. But this is at least three times it has happened. I have passed a 13-count too so I suspect the ace migrated from one deal to another…

IIRC
There was a ‘That Ridiculous’ feature in the Bridge World which on one day showed a newspaper column with one hand missing an ace and another separate column of the same day with the extra ace!

(I'd guess about 1983-85 for those who wish to pursue it.)
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The auction as shown has the bids wrongly aligned I think; it shows your side in 1NTx.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It may be obvious but it might nonetheless be worth pointing out that Acol plays strong twos not Weak Twos.
June 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree David's point that my excuse in the post mortem was ‘I knew you were going to fix me later so I fixed you first.’
June 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not agree. They are entitled to ask and receive an answer. But any convention card that gave space for an extra li ne or two on the shading of responsive doubles (a separate line for the double of 4m, 4, 4, five-level calls….would lose the ability to define more relevant calls.
Jeff Rubens wrote about this and won an IBPA award as the Useful Space Principle.

:)
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You may not have heard it but when I was editing some of the early books I did make that point. His valid argument was saving space; you don't have that excuse.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Put up the ace and limit the damage; pitch a club and play a spade to the queen, hoping they cant get a D ruff.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wish I could answer this but you are going to be my first subject of “If a writer cant be bothered to make South declarer rather than North then I refuse to contribute.”
Seriously dude – how hard is it to help your readers if you are asking for help?
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought I saw 74 somewhere?
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing 2NT as GF except facing a doubly minimum hand is fine by me. But having the agreement that 2NT then 3 is NF – allowing opener to get out with a minimum in HCP is OK as well.
May 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think any of those dummies compare to the flat board posted three/four weeks ago where Larry Sealy opened 1 in third seat on a 5-4-4-0 six count with AQxx and out. When his partner boosted him to 6 I doubt if he would have hesitated to settle for -300 but dummy came down with a mere A/—/KJ109xx/J109xxx
May 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I took 5 as hearts and a minor with some grand slam interest, 5NT as bid the minor.

I would have thought 4NT then 5 as the grand slam try.
May 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The NY Times is running ‘two not-touch’ puzzles right now. Check them out… it may just be the variety/novelty but I'm loving them.
May 26
.

Bottom Home Top