Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Debbie Rosenberg
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 61 62 63 64
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After 1m-1N, I think of 2N as inviting partner's 6-10 range, while 3N is auction ending, therefore not descriptive.

2N can be bid with an offshape 15+-17 or with a bad balanced 18.

3N might be based on a long suit, or it might be 18+-19 balanced.
It's auction ending, so partner doesn't need to know, unlike 1m-1suit, 3N, which is always based on a long minor.

1M-1N, 3N needs to be descriptive, since the range of hands (both strength and distribution) responder can have is much wider. I like to agree that this is always based on at least a 6-card major. 2N is 17+-19 balanced (though could sometimes include a 6-card major).
Feb. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Richard. Yes, the Bay Area High School Championship has been growing, due to a number of factors which I won't get into on this thread.
I will say that I am grateful to have a local group (all Bridgewinners contributors Lynn Johannesen, Michael Bodell, Will Watson and Max Schireson) committed to having detailed conditions of contest published in advance, whether most of the high school students look at them or not. We are also committed to being responsive year to year to feedback from the participants. We realized the format we had set up initially didn't work as well for larger numbers, so put a fair amount of effort into changing for this year, and trying to “get it right” for all possible numbers of teams spelled out in the conditions of contest.
Feb. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve and Bobby's thoroughness may have made everyone else look bad by comparison. That is unfair. Thank you to Steve and Bobby for all of that great analysis, and to everyone else for theirs.

Kevin and Ben bid 12 hands for Friday. Kevin told me that they were asked only to discuss 2 or 3 of them, and (unfortunately) they thought they were meant to discuss bidding only, so didn't analyze the play. I don't know if that was intentional or a miscommunication.
Feb. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Al.

I'm not a formats expert by any means, but in the interest of clarity and transparency, it would nice to see something like this in advance:

If a-b teams enter, the format will be x
If c-d teams enter, the format will be y
If e-f teams enter, the format will be z

We are careful to include this info in the CoC even for our local HS Championship, which, in the three years it's been held, has drawn 4, 6 and 10 teams respectively. That way nothing is being done on the fly, behind closed doors, at the last minute.

I believe Meike also had another question. See above. And there are one or two questions from others which haven't been addressed. If you are working on getting answers, I'm sure the posters would appreciate hearing that in response to their question.
Feb. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This seems like a sensible suggestion, Marty. I wonder why it isn't already on the schedule. There is a side team event listed for those who don't qualify in the Mixed teams.

Speaking of that side teams opposite the Mixed, I would like to know who can enter and when. For example, will a team who qualifies for the ko, but then loses its first half day match have anything to play in?
Feb. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kyle,

My plan is to double and then bid 2N over partner's 2m advance, as I would with a balanced 19 count.

I feel the hand is too good for a 1N overcall. I don't feel strongly, and could see underbidding 1N.

With a good 18, it is more attractive to double planning to then bid Notrump if you are likely to get to bid 1N. Over a 1S opening, that's never the case.
Feb. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Been there, though I've recently learned that “the kids” use GF for girlfriend
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ah, I hope that's the case with at least most of them. Unfortunately a friend just told me that today he did get such a reply regarding a message he had intended for me, which went to someone else instead.
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The room was an open club duplicate?

Thanks again.
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Sriram.

I have to ask - are the private messages actually reaching the unintended recipients, or does it just look that way? So far nobody has told me they received a message from me by mistake, but I fear they may be hitting reply in an attempt to do so, and then it goes to someone else.

If that is happening, I hope everyone takes private with a grain of salt when composing messages.
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, I'm not clear, did most the room misplay it and then you gave it as a lesson, or was it a lesson hand only? Thanks for the follow-up.

As for the messages, do remember whether you sent the correctly delivered one the same way as the one you tried to send to me?
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have you checked the recipient names in your sent message box? Mine shows the wrong names there now.
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Al, you said the following above
“@ Jim Fox The WBF does not reserve the right to change the CoC, regardless of past behavior…..”

Yet the third paragraph of the very first section of the CoC seems to contradict you:

“The Rules and Regulations Committee of the WBF and/or the WBF Executive Council reserve the right to make any amendments to these Conditions at any time should it be deemed necessary to do so.”

I appreciate that current attitudes may be different from the past, and that an effort is being made to minimize the “need” for later changes. Still, I think it's only fair to acknowledge that the WBF is indeed reserving the right to make changes freely.
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Al.

If I may, I would suggest that rather than having this sort of information available only in the CoC, a more detailed version of the “schedule”, which includes a description of each event, would be welcome.

I suspect most players do not wish to open the conditions of contest, let alone search through and interpret them for basic info such as entry fees and guaranteed days of play.

The published schedule itself raises many questions. For example: Are “side events” WBF events? What is the Joan Gerard Cup? Who can enter the Youth Triathlon?
I'm not sure if any of these questions are answered in the Supplementary CoC. Whether or not they are, I believe many players would appreciate such information in a more accessible, yet still detailed, form.
Feb. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No such data has been compiled that I know of, but I'm pretty sure I know of a member of our community who could work her magic and produce relevant stats quickly.

Emily Middleton, are you reading this?

If running the study were a job, maybe some junior would outbid Emily. But wait, that would mean they'd need to underbid…..
Jan. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, but I think speculation, especially based on CoC from a totally different event (not just a different year), may just confuse the issue.
I'm requesting a clear explanation of the CoC for this event, and in particular, would like to know how to apply the paragraph I quoted.
Jan. 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, then what could “from different team competitions” be referring to?
Jan. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see it that way, Max. Just because something isn't prohibited doesn't suggest to me that it is allowed.

I'm not trying to come up with ludicrous scenarios that might not be expressly prohibited. I'm trying to figure out how to apply the paragraph I quoted. I don't see how it can apply to your scenario, since a player “duly entered” in the open pairs could not possibly enter any stage of the women's pairs. I think that part is clearly covered in the conditions, but I'm on my phone now so it's tough to find and quote.
Jan. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Regarding Drop In Rules

See p14 of CoC: I tried to cut and paste the whole section, but lost formatting. Here's what a think is the paragraph most relevant to my question:

According to the CoC:
d) A duly registered pair formed of two players from different team competitions, or with just one of the two members playing in a team competition, can drop in to the pertinent pairs event as soon as both players (or the one playing with a non-participant in the teams) get knocked out in the team event they are participating at.


Here's a scenario of personal interest:

I will be playing in the McConnell. Suppose I “duly enter” the Open Pairs with a player who is playing in the Rosenblum. That player is eliminated in time for the qualifying, but I am still in the McConnell. Can we drop in together to the Semifinal or Final of the Open Pairs? It sounds to me from the above as if we can, but I am skeptical.

And if I can do that, can I instead “duly enter” the Open Pairs with a player who isn't playing at all, and then “drop in” when I am eliminated from the McConnell?
I'm pretty sure that I can't, given that I can't drop in with my McConnell partner. That part seems clear from the CoC. But it's not at all clear to me when I can “drop in”
Jan. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Regarding Length of Play in Pair Events:

How many days of play are guaranteed to those entering a pair event?

Each Pair Event has a qualifying round, a semifinal round, and a final.
In each case there is a Semifinal A and a Semifinal B, followed by Final A and Final B.

Does everyone who enters the event play in Final B if they don't make Final A? Or is there some point at which some pairs are completely eliminated and relegated to a side event, if anything?

An example:

Pair X enters the Open Pairs 3-day qualifying. They average 40% and move on to Semifinal B (I think).
In the 2-day Semifinal B, they again average 40%. What happens to them now? Are they eliminated completely, or do they go on to Final B?
Jan. 29
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 61 62 63 64
.

Bottom Home Top