Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christina Lund Madsen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok, I got some details about the appeal. Apparently the explanation was that 3NT DENIED 3 and 4 - it was a misunderstanding between HH and not a conscious decision to hide the good 4-card -suit.

Having a wrong idea about declarer's distribution induced Welland to lead a spade and misled the defense during the whole hand and so the committee must have decided that with the correct information the defense would have prevailed.

I have no opinion on this matter personally, however I am very fond of dramatic endings to bridge matches :)
March 22, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Debbie, I heard it from Dennis Bilde, the young and talented player on Auken's team.
I have no idea when the comittee met, however they could have met around nine since I am quite certain I heard the news immediately and posted it here the second I heard.
I am in Denmark and assumed that most of you would still be sleeping:)
March 22, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dean, do you know for a fact this is what the misexplanation was about or do you conclude from the BBO-broadcast? Of course neither Helgemo nor Helness is obliged to show their spadesuit, however I doubt that being the only issue, since in that case their wouldn't be a case of misexplanation.
March 22, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would like to reply shortly to your comments as a private person, not a representative of the CBI. I appreciate your interest very much.

Dear Barry. I am slightly surprised to hear you have not heard of the tournament before. However it is only held every second year, the first time in November 2010. Stephen Garner wrote an excellent report from the tournament that was published in the ACBL bulletin at the fall nationals the same year.
It is the first time I have posted news about the tournament on Bridgewinners; however other bridgesites such as newinbridge.com, http://csbnews.org/ and Neapolitan Club have written more than once about this year's edition.
Now you and all Bridgewinners' followers know about the tournament and I hope you will all appreciate the info.

Dear Phil. To me it does matter in the sense that I consider Sabine equal to any man. That is why she is participating in this tournament. That we mention that she is considered the strongest female player is merely an expression of pride having her as a participant and info to anyone not knowing her name and reputation.

I would have liked more female players participating, however it is my clear impression that the more female players, less the prestige. I would very much like to see that more women would get the chance to prove their worth by being invited to a tournament such as this. However women should not be invited because they are women, but because they have earned an invitation being brilliant bridge players.

I long for the day a female pair wins an open event - not least if I were part of the pair.

Best regards,
Christina

Jan. 12, 2013
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm from Europe and I think we will be slaughtered by the US, which in my eyes is a great team, although Levin-Weinstein and Meckwell are conspicuous by their absence.
I look especially forward to watching my hero Joe Grue and my favourite Bridge Camp-partner Joel Wooldridge in action.
Sept. 9, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just a quick reply concerning the practical issues: I imagine that there will be a scoreboard in the room (like there is a clock) that shows the score in imps after the played amount of boards. Players should not focus their energy on what they played in the other room and thus not see the score of a specific board. So there is no need to play the boards simultaneously. It is exactly the same principle as following the running scores as we already can during major championships.

The score should be from the results entered in the Bridgemate. Of course that can be a problem with typing errors, but maybe the players will be better at checking the scores or in major KO's a TD may have time to check the score during the match.

How the players will deal with it is their issue and exactly the challenge I want to propose. If they get distracted it is their problem. In my opinion it will bring a new psychological dimension to the play.

I was provoked by hearing about how Steve Weinstein knew the score and therefore wasn't allowed to play the last board. I just don't see the problem as long as all players know the score. If he knows that he is up by ten, he might be passive, if he knows he is down, he might be aggressive. Either way pressure is added.

Of course this is mostly interesting in close matches and the idea is meant for KO-matches, since knowing the score in a RR is not quite so important (although it would be interesting at the end).

Perhaps some matches might even become closer because the team down 70 imps become more creative. Wouldn't it be great if all matches were close?
Aug. 2, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is allowed to be only two pairs in international events. Why should we encourage bridge teams to play socially rather than tactically? Would that not simply lower the general level? Think about how many players never leave the bench in the European Football Championship in these days. I played in Dublin, and we were never near qualification for VC in Bali, but according to the last butler (which I agree often can me misguiding because of differences in opponents' level) we would have had good chances of qualifying had we played only with two pairs - and actually there were so few teams in the women's event that it would have made more sense instead of playing only 20 boards a day. I think it will develop bridge in the long run to be allowed to use the players tactically - and also encourage more sponsors since it would increase their possibilities of achieving good results.
June 26, 2012
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But there is a Ryder Cup. The Warren Buffett cup in the same years as the Ryder Cup.

I disagree regarding what the sponsors do for bridge. It is BECAUSE of them bridge becomes more and more spectacular, because without them the players would not be able to spend all of their time playing bridge. It is even more evident when you look at which countries do well in the international championships. It is always the countries with a lot of professional players, and I don't believe that those players were necessarily better than the am's before they became pro's. Rather they got an opportunity based on a good result and grasped it.

I think in the future it will be even more difficult for countries only with amateur players to do well in international competitions. They simply don't have the same opportunities to develop their skills.

I would rather see more sponsors and thus more professional players and briliant bridge.
July 31, 2011
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can help with the second row right picture. At the left it is Martin Schaltz from Denmark. His screenmate is Pierre Zimmermann, who is partnering Franck Multon with his back to the camera. The guy scrathching his chin is Morten Lund Madsen, also from Denmark.

Concerning the icelandic pair in pictures 2 and 5, the blond-haired is Bjarni Einarsson. The no-haired I suppode to be his partner Adalsteinn Jorgensen.
July 31, 2011
.

Bottom Home Top