Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Bill March
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed - no one would say that MP fouled the board on purpose(they may think it) as short of a mind reading machine it's completely unprovable. That's why those who say ‘he was cleared of cheating’ are simply setting up a straw man, it was a non issue.
Nov. 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not prejudiced, l don't know Mike at all so have no idea whether he would intentially cheat or not. On balance of probability I'd say not, but here in the UK we've seen Hutton and we've seen Butler so we know what a solution of lime and water looks like.
Nov. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We've already had the thread on hated conventions - capalleti's not that bad,it's just like responding to 1nt, vast choice,all with pluses and minuses - yet nearly everyone thinks their own methods are best.
Nov. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Melanie - you have inadvertently ended your question with a question mark rather than a smiley!
Nov. 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul - my mistake,when the bill to remove ‘not proven ’ was introduced I (wrongly) got the impression it was a done deal, Google has not as yet revealed to me as whether this was defeated or is simply grinding on.
Nov. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My understanding was that the ‘not proven’ option in Scotland was (sadly) removed a few years ago.
Nov. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John - Jim is as British as fish and chips(and a Gold cup winner to boot) though whether he understands cricket even so is a moot point(no need to thank me Jim!)
Nov. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree with Ed, if I had foolishly conceded as defender(with partner agreeing) then I wouldn't be at all comfortable with trying to get the trick back.
Nov. 1, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Chris - you make a very good argument,however I still believe that ‘timing’ differences may result in a comment getting removed due to a disproportionate number of early flags.
Oct. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Personally,I would have liked the opportunity to see it.
Oct. 31, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
'Oh shit'
Oct. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not sure of the best thread for this story.
One ‘rule’ that's taken me far too long to learn is ‘if there’s only one card out in your long suit then always play your highest card just in case it's not what you think it is'
Many years ago I was(in dummy) playing in 4H,dummy was all winners except for Q10xxx of trumps, the only trump outstanding was the K. I called for a low trump, RHO won the 9. Partner(John Currie,it was you)fearful of what further atrocity may be committed now said ‘dummy’s high' and claimed!
Oct. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was playing against a pair that had represented Ireland. I was playing in spades,my LHO led the club K then switched to a diamond - I won and led a trump which RHO won to cash the club ACE On which LHO discarded the heart two. RHO led a club for a ruff and I looked at the fully completed WBF convention card, There was a dense paragraph on discarding which though I considered myself well versed in terminology I didn't understand at all.
So, I ask rho about the discard( the move has been called several minutes earlier) he says that since he's giving a ruff then it doesn't mean anything! I explain that the knowledge he has could affect the size of club that he is giving the ruff with,he simply stares at me as if I'm speaking a foreign language.
I have one last try, forget this hand I say - suppose that I'm playing in spades,get a trump lead,draw trumps and the first discard is the heart two,what's that? My rho bows his head then starts stroking his chin, finally he says ‘that’s interesting'
Being soft in the head I did not call the director.
Oct. 27, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My own introduction to John Collings was a few years before his death when he threw all his cards at his partner after a bad result(entirely of JC's making).His partner(a very good player)picked up the cards from the floor with no comment,maybe this was just normal behaviour. I regret to say I didn't call the director.
Oct. 27, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Avon/Charles
This is off the point,Truscot's book convinced me that RS were guilty but it's not holy writ. All I' m saying is that a private ‘confession’ to a prosecution witness is useless - a letter to yourself ‘confirming’ the story is equally valueless,it simply shows that it wasn't just made up recently.
Oct. 24, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was the same time that the NHS was in the same position(and the British police)
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And as described in ‘story of an accusation’ a witness can't corroborate their own evidence with a letter they themselves have written.
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Chris
I'm not a Reese supporter but you have to bear in mind that the Schapiro ‘admission’ was what a prosecution witness claimed was said with no corroboration.
Oct. 23, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Eugene
From our previous conversations I know this is not a fixed number but a percentage,I also now know that you're never going to tell me what it is - so you'll be happy to know(and no doubt not only you) that I give up re this issue.Let others take up the cudgel.
Oct. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't ‘need’ to know either - but I am interested. On a different thread I had an exchange re what a suitable level of flagging for removal was,I mentioned(at random) a figure of 10% thinking this was low,straightaway another poster said that was far too high! Eugene has commented elsewhere that it is a ‘majority’ decision,I suspect that that will be a definition of majority not all agree with.
Hanan below gives a theoretical example of possible unfairness but I think more recent events give a real life potential situation. The threads re BZ and Polish participation in the Bermuda bowl have generated massive comment,often split on national lines - if an ‘anti American’ post appeared when America' was awake then I can imagine a lot of flags,maybe a removal,but when the rest of the world catches up it may not seem so bad.
I must stress,I think the BW staff do a good job and are fully entitled to run things as they see fit,I'd just like more transparency on the flagging process.
Oct. 20, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top