Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Debbie Rosenberg
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 89 90 91 92
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm a Marriott loyalist and would love a room at Le Westin at the bridge rate for the whole time, if that opens up and I can get it. In the meantime, I've booked the Fairfield Inn, a 15 minute walk away, for a $159 CAD long term stay rate. It can be canceled up to 2 days before arrival.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for all the comments. I am persuaded that there is no policy imperative for tournament directors to educate players (via PP or otherwise) when there is a blatant violation of law, at least not in the ACBL.

The fact that some others and myself would like to see that done does not mean that a TD was necessarily remiss in his duties by declining to attempt this in any particular instance. I suppose I won't bother even calling the director back in the future when there is probably no damage, and if I feel inclined to submit a player memo when a player should have known better, that's up to me.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm trying now and getting that same gap for July 19-21. Frustrating!
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you for all this info!
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can easily edit the article, just not the title. Look for the edit button on the right.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Dave Beer, I first learned 2 way Checkback over 1N rebids in the mid 1980s, and I learned that 2 puppeted 2. I still play that version with most partners and still call it 2 way checkback.
I think it was at least 20 years after that before I heard of XYanything. So I don't think the distinction is as clear as you indicate, if it exists at all.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As others have answered, Gold Rush is a restricted event which awards gold points. I think the awards are appropriately modest though, and there are not actually “a lot of masterpoints available” Obviously that is subjective.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you, David.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Steve Chen that it doesn't matter, for the reasons he says.

3 quite likely is/should be a stopper search bid. I could see that bid being made with, for example, a hand such as:

Jxx
Jxx
AKJx
Kxx

Why would anyone make that bid rather than rebidding their AKQxxxx suit? Partner is allowed to bid 3N over 3, and if he can't, surely you'd prefer to have made a descriptive natural bid.
Jan. 13
Debbie Rosenberg edited this comment Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Daniel, sorry that I wasn't clear. I believe that I had already told the director that I thought the 3 bid was a problem, irrespective of any need for adjustment, both of the first two times he was at the table. The third time, when he came back saying there would be no adjustment, I then asked whether he thought there was a problem.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Responder bid 2 intending it as game forcing. He has not yet shown long diamonds. His partner, the opener, bid 3. I don't see why responder should act as it that was strong.

In my very strong opinion 3 is the normal bid, and the only one the vast majority of experienced players would even consider. 3 very strongly suggests a blatant attempt to use the UI to avoid missing a game.
As I told Douglas above, I am not going to debate this. I would ask people to accept this a given for the purpose of the discussion about what the director's responsibility is, and if you can't do that, please feel free to ignore this topic.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Douglas, I think it is irrelevant whether the 3 bid can be justified (W did say some things, but no expert would buy them). 3 is the normal bid, and 3 smacks of a blatant attempt to avoid playing in 3 because partner didn't alert 2. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to debate this.

I agree that we need to appreciate having directors. So rather than simply complain about this one, I'm seeking guidance as to what the ACBL expects directors to do in this situation.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, Patrick, I don't understand what you are saying. How can 3 be an underbid, when the player bidding it has already created a game force?
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fwiw, my opponent certainly understood that I had told the director I thought they had blatantly used UI, and approached me about it after the match (at first with some resentment, but as I said, I believe they came to understand).
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Daniel, I believe I did tell the director that. I don't remember the exact words, but I can't imagine it wouldn't have been very clear from the various things said at the three times the director was at the table (when dummy came down, at the end of the hand, and then later when he came back to give the ruling).

I suppose it's possible that he still didn't understand, but it was not for lack of effort on my part. However, part of my point is that even if I'd done absolutely nothing to bring this problem to the director's attention, shouldn't they be seeing it and doing something about it themselves?
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, Patrick, I believe that technically the player correcting the MI is supposed to summon the director first, and then do so with the director present. If they fail to do that, then one of the other players at the table ought to call as soon as they mention that there was a failure to alert.

In practice, usually none of that happens, and it's not clear to me that it would be practical. There often wouldn't be enough directors to handle the calls without major delays to the game if a director were called every time they were technically supposed to be.

In this case, the defenders knew they hadn't been damaged by the MI, and, before the dummy came down, there was no reason to think that W had acted on the UI. So in practice, I think it was quite reasonable to call when I did.

I'm not sure why you are mentioning a lead made face down, since the failure to alert was announced before any lead was made.

I believe this is peripheral to the questions I am asking, though I certainly don't mind you bringing it up.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Hendrik.

Though this player was experienced enough to know better in theory, I'm satisfied that they've already learned a lot from this, and I feel no need to pursue it further.

I'm now concerned about the director's inaction. Am I supposed to report that to someone? Before I even consider that, it would be nice to know whether they actually violated any ACBL rule or policy by doing nothing.
Ideally I wouldn't even need to point out that there was blatant use of UI. It creates an awkward social situation for a player. Having nothing done by the director even after a player puts themselves in that position is quite discouraging.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought so too, and I'm sure many readers will agree. My question is what the ACBL position is on the director (afaik) doing absolutely nothing about this, not even attempting to educate the player. It is possible the director did so privately without my knowledge.
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congrats to Olivia, Brian, Charlie and Andrew!

I believe that means three consecutive events won for Brian, and two consecutive events won for each of the others (Olivia didn't play between last Sunday and yesterday)!
Jan. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you never ask unless you are considering acting, you give UI every time you either ask OR don't ask. I advise my partners to routinely ask when the response to the opening bid is alerted, and personally I strive to do so every time. Even if I/they aren't totally consistent, at least sometimes asking, when not planning to act, cuts down on the overall UI.

The other auction where I routinely ask, and in this case I insist that my students do, is when we open 1N (strong) and the next hand intervenes with an alerted call. Not asking is extremely revealing.
Jan. 13
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 89 90 91 92
.

Bottom Home Top