Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Levin
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Louis, I think Jim was saying that implicit in the offer of bridge advice is that the asker considers the askee weaker.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After West takes the A at Trick 3, Declarer should realize that there will be ample side-suit winners and that the K is offside, and therefore the goal should be to lose no more than two trump tricks. Accordingly, Declarer should duck a spade in both hands at Trick 5, to eliminate the possibility of an uppercut. If East wins and returns a heart, Dummy ruffs with the Q, takes the A, and crosses to the J so that the closed hand can lead a third round of trumps.

If at Trick 4, West shifts to a diamond (instead of continuing hearts), it seems that Declarer can do essentially the same thing.

Steve's idea of ducking the first round of clubs might succeed even if after a pause. The threatened club ruff would not only score an additional defensive trump trick, but destroy one of Declarer's club winners. But I'm not sure whether ducking the club is West's correct play in principle.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Under the ACBL's regulations, an analogous case might be where a player has available a support double and bidding two of partner's suit. I believe that the former is alertable but the latter isn't, even though many Bridge Winners members have said that this seems to conflict with the principle of full disclosure.
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“You should have told her why you laughed then and there.”

According to a reply to a discussion started by Mark Raphaelson, Michael Xu did not laugh in the opponent's presence.
Sept. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's nice, if my answer below is correct. (Mouse-select to view.)

After winning the second round of clubs (at Trick 5), cash the diamond ace. Let's say West retains 3=4 in the majors. Lead a heart and drop Dummy's queen under West's king. If West exits with a spade, win cheaply, cash the heart ace, and exit with a heart. If West instead exits with a heart, take two hearts and exit with the spade queen.
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps Steve meant “well-defined” as well as “written.” (My comment isn't meant to suggest that Law 74A2 be better defined.)
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@RR: In your suggested line, can't West exit with a heart? Declarer would still need to find a ninth winner to go with one trump, two ruffs, three diamonds, one heart, and one spade.

(Edited.)
Sept. 6
David Levin edited this comment Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True (about high card counting). I meant that I wasn't sure whether solicited advice on the need to plan or the need to count would be more valuable in this instance.
Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even when one is asked to comment, it's often unclear what input would be the most valuable.

In the stem deal, it seems to me that Declarer's fundamental error was in not looking ahead. After diamonds failed to break, she realized she needed a second spade trick but didn't anticipate that if the finesse lost and the defenders continued hearts, the only entry to her hand would be to ruff with her last trump. Otherwise, she might have led to the Q instead of the 9 (if she didn't want to risk losing the last two tricks).

Alternatively, she might have deferred cashing the Q, so that this card could provide the transportation for leading a second spade in case diamonds didn't break. This would succeed on K onside, J10 onside with the K offside, or 3=3 diamonds, without risking down two. The possible cost, which seems outweighed, would be to make +110 when +130 was available (by testing diamonds, finding the suit 3=3, and leading to the Q instead of the 9).
Sept. 6
David Levin edited this comment Sept. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Any poll that doesn't enumerate all possibilities needs to include “Other”.
Sept. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Style nitpick on page 10, "appears doomed to failure".
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I were an administrator, I'd probably focus on problems for which the community could not devise a workaround (such as the words “Bot Forum”).
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Joakim Fryklund—Randy's phrase seems hard to definitively label, but I think I'd go for “simile”: figurative comparison using “like” or “as”.
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the hypothetical layout on page 3, ducking the first two spade leads seems to work also, inelegant as it is.
Aug. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I start with the 3, it might seem dangerous to LHO to duck with both diamond honors: Declarer might have K-fourth with insignificant spots and be about to duck high with Dummy's 10. So, if West plays low, I take the ace and let the 10 ride, which should pretty much guarantee three diamond tricks if my opening premise is correct.

If West takes a diamond quack at Trick 3 and shifts to a spade, I take the ace, take another diamond hook, and cash my red-suit winners. If West started with the K, 10-fourth, and J-fourth, the last winner is going to hurt. On the other hand, if there's no indication of West's being under duress, then if I can at least place West with fewer than five clubs, this will make playing for the drop a 3:2 favorite over finessing against the J.

Added: If West has fewer than five clubs, then 3:2 is the ratio between club layouts where only the drop would work (15) and club layouts where only the finesse would work (10). This seemed to establish a clear enough favorite to make it unnecessary to adjust for vacant spaces or consider the cases where both work or neither works.
Aug. 27
David Levin edited this comment Aug. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think a more meaningful comparison would be a car club for owners of Yugos.
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It ran out. The next batch should be ready by IV:XV.
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming that more prescribed medicines tend to be taken by people 65 and over than by people 35 and under, would a study involving the former age group have required more participants, to account for possible interactions between the stimulant of interest and those medicines?
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I found an abstract at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432818315535, but an electronic version of the full article is behind a paywall.
Aug. 25
.

Bottom Home Top