Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Yates
1 2 3 4 ... 169 170 171 172
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One can get to a “no MI” ruling on the theory & was the agreement and E simply fielded the auction by passing 4. So N would now not have any MI. S does, but it is now irrelevant to the N/S claim and result.

For this decision, the supporting documentation was a little weak IMO. But then not everything gets documented and I also think its kind of odd to have an agreement to play 1C-(3D)-4C as hearts & clubs but not extend it - though I understand there are differences. E/W did have something. . .so?

Of note is how important screens can be towards the goal of eliminating UI. Had this happened in the finals of an NABC pairs event, E would have alerted and explained “C&H”, then N/S would be arguing for 5-X b/c of UI since 4 “must” be a cuebid. (A much stronger case w/o screens.) If the playing conditions in Montecatini didn’t suck so badly that two weeks of torture caused your partner to totally lose his mind on defense and probably also reveal any state secrets he might possess, I would just write this off as another example of how behind the rest of the world the ACBL can be. But maybe everyone’s RA (see PBU ruling) is getting senile. Or maybe just the whole world (if you watch the news) and the bridge world is actually behind the curve.

Back to MI. Even if there was, I am not a buyer in damage. Obviously once E passes 4 you have no case at all, as N actually is defending 4. So N/S need to make the case for both of your points that (a) N would have X’d 4 and (b) not lost his mind in defending. However, there is no connection between the explanation and the defensive decisions.

I am also not a buyer that 4 would have been doubled. First if W can have either major, North should much rather want to defend 5 doubled that 4 doubled. Yet N failed to X 4. If West held the same hand but Q/Ax in reds instead of Qx/A, W can make 4-X. Similarly, if you swap 2 & 9 of spades, 4S-X is making (most likely) but 4 undoubled is almost certainly going down. Since you are not on lead against 5, you desperately want a spade on the go against 5-X. If W has KQ / QJ10xx / - / AKQJ10x and is actually trying for slam (off 3 KC), the “obvious” A (or K) lead can give away the contract if S is 3-0 now instead of 0-3.

Bridge is a decision making game. I am generally reluctant to void mistakes in the perfect (imaginary) world of the mulligan, because people do not play perfectly in the real world and then the adjustments excuse errors and therefore grant an edge versus other N/S pairs. I am willing to grant you a little benefit of a doubt, but this seems way too much to ask.

On the last day of the Vandy, a tired and sleepy Curtis looked through his hand for a lead against 7. The trump ace looked good. -2 IMPs for not doubling, showing even WC players miss stuff when tired. This North was also obviously tired, too. Two weeks of high level bridge, bad playing conditions and stressing everything to reach the finals. (So this hand was not demonstrative of your partnerships general level of play). A player is obviously asking about the alert, but I see no reason to believe a different explanation would have been processed differently during the bidding.

I think “no MI” is possible, but “no adjustment” is an easier decision to make.
6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For some cultures, “full responsibility” meant sharpening one's blade.

I miss the old days too, Avon.
8 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Oh, that. That is the advice he gives opponents.”

Too funny. And also some of the best advice Benito ever gave since it worked out so well for him :)
June 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am OK with a 3 opener in these circumstances. North certainly does not have a 5 call.
June 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is probably MP and I doubt any defender is not taking A&K of diamonds at the go. You know E is trumping a spade. You don't know who has K, but if it isn't partner and you will get nothing for -680.

But I do agree that he might drop the K because he will think about it. South passed, has AK and knows a spade is not cashing. Since @ these colors N might have 6, S should have 4 spades for never playing the suit. With AK(xx) / K10x(x) in minors he might have hit 5. (Of course he might be related to West, too)

Another consideration is the club might be stiff or their might be a diamond ruff coming. Anyway, a lot to think about, but declarer is certainly thinking about it.
June 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not happy about “no adjustment because North's blatant use of UI might not have worked out.” I don't find 3 in 3rd seat favorable particularly shocking, but bidding after the BIT is totally unacceptable.

So probably a PP here. I doubt a noob opened 3. Not really wanting to help out W who could not find either an opening or a X of 5. Did he really think partner was sacrificing at the 5-level RvW?
June 23
David Yates edited this comment June 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think robot bridge awards should be mimetic polyalloy points.
June 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeah, those tinfoil hats do nothing about the voices in my head.
June 23
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I doubt E-W play Precision. You really don't understand Precision if you pass the E hand - especially unfavorable in second seat.
June 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We have met the opponent and he is he
June 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“…but head director filled out recorder form and said never again.”

What do I think? I think this is what has been wrong with this game since forever. A bunch of pinhead ninnies believing there is only one way to think: THEIRS.

Responding 1NT here is a tactical bid. It is by no means risk-free. 4th seat might bid 2, South with AK10xxx / Qx /x / KQJx rebids 2 and gets whacked with no game for E/W.
June 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“What convention, if it had been invented when you started out, would have earned you the most additional masterpoints?”

Since conventions like Blackwood were invented before the ACBL was even born, I would have to say the answer would be:

The Libertarian Convention.

This is the belief in liberty and free choice. Had our ACBL ever adopted this conventional viewpoint and actually ALLOWED conventions to be played, I would have played much more bridge, attended many more tournaments and even kept my membership up-to-date.

All that would have contributed to many more masterpoints as those would have been the byproduct of fun.

IMO, the best single convention for standard since I started playing is short club with transfer responses. This is because it fixes more problems with standard bidding than absolutely anything else - alas, this is STILL not GCC legal.
June 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Normally I don't freak out about an outstanding trump, but the end position looks peculiar given how many diamonds have been played and there is still an outstanding trump. So I am with Andrew and would like to know how the play went up to this point.
June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The meaning is still contextual.

1NT - 5NT (forcing to 6NT, inviting 7)
4S - 5NT (GSF)
bunch of bids - 5NT (most often pick these days)

Widespread acceptance of keycard and exclusion keycard has reduced the need for “Josephine” (which actually predates “Blackwood”) in many auctions.
June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just out of curiosity - I have not played with bots in years and years - will they consistently make the same decision given the same situation and information?
June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Richard, it is a rare bridge player who admits his bid was wrong :)
June 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that George Jacobs & Co hold the record, losing the Open BAM in 2001 Vegas to Meltzer & Co by 0.01 point after four sessions.

That particular record cannot be beaten, only tied. Probably a major pairs event with larger top scores could theoretically slice it closer on a % of a point.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with most. I think “abomination” is a bit of an overbid.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Other, because there is always an other and that answer is there is no real answer. For the most part, it will usually easier to develop this hand with a start of 1. However, the best answer might be in context of your partner’s tendencies as responder.

The issue with light opening bids is that the average hand is 10 HCP. In days of old, with “sound” and sometimes “super-sound” opening bids, responder could make an F1 2/1 with 10 or, playing F-NT, handle a sequence like 1M-1NT; 2m-? and now 2NT with 10(/11) is easy.

But, if you open 1 on Axxxx / x / QJxx / Axx (another recent poll) and play F-NT, then it can be dangerous for responder to rebid 2NT on 10 HCP after 1-1NT; 2-?

A reason it is easier opening light in a Precision context is not because the opening M bid is limited to 15, but because lots of semi-bal hands get tossed into a 14-16 NT. Pretty sure either Meckwell or G-H would open 1NT if spades where AQxxx. (Fred & Kit might open 1 on that 15). What this means is responder doesn’t get a lot of pressure with 10-counts. Also you have a SF-NT response. So if you see a lot of experts opening 1 on this sort of hand, it might be because of system or a non-expert partner.

If my partner rebids 2NT on 10 after 1-1NT; 2-? then I am opening 1 - which is also the best way to develop this hand opposite good values with responder. I also have a partner who never offers 2NT on 10 after a F-NT response. So I might open 1NT with her. The backup plan of 2NT after preference to 2 will be a little shaky red at MP if responder dredged up a 1NT on some 5-7 count.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The bidding is the thing. Pass and play 2NT-X or saw them off red if they bid.

Too many players cannot figure out deals because they insist on bidding when it is their turn. If you don't know what a NF pass looks like, you ultimately have no idea what any bid really means.

The problem here is nearly everyone bids 2NT on anything. South auto preferences for diamonds with anything. So W is opening on 11 and E is acting at the 3-level with a 5-count, N-S could be close to a game - or maybe E/W - and no one knows what is going on until dummy hits.
June 15
1 2 3 4 ... 169 170 171 172
.

Bottom Home Top