Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ed Reppert
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 694 695 696 697
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you sure of that, Chris? :-)
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Probative?
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you have Parallels (not cheap) you can run Windows in it and pretty much any Windows program in that. Alternatively there is WINE (Wine Is Not an Emulator :) Many windows programs can be put in a WINE bottle <grin> and run on a Mac. Haven't tried it with Jeannie, though.
6 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A couple of points:

  • It is not illegal to ask about a specific call. It is ill-advised because doing so may well provide UI to partner.

  • The ACBL Alert Procedure says, among other things “Ethical bridge players will recognize the obligation to give complete explanations,” “When asked, the bidding side must give a full explanation of the agreement. Stating the common or popular name of the convention is not sufficient” (neither is “forcing” or other shorthand), “The opponents need not ask exactly the ”right“ question,” and “Any request for information should be the trigger. Opponents need only indicate the desire for information - all relevant disclosure should be given automatically”. Other jurisdictions have similar requirements.

  • Requests for a review of the auction and requests for an explanation of the auction are two separate and distinct things. IMO it is neither necessary nor desirable to ask for both, and if only an explanation of the auction has been requested it is improper to give a review along with it.

  • If an opponent gives a parsimonious explanation, ask for more information. “Tell me more, please” is enough. No competent director would rule that the follow-on question gave an illegal advantage to the asking side. If after the second question they've still been parsimonious call the director. “I've asked twice for an explanation, and I still don't feel I've been given a complete one”.
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“play continues only if one of the defenders had requested that and the other had concurred.”

No. Play continues only if a player of the non-claiming side requests it and all three other players (including dummy) concur.

Declarer would have been well within his rights to put his cards away and score it as 4 making four after fifteen seconds of “no comment” from the other side.
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And then what?
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Right there where you put it, Robin. :-)
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess some players just have to bid when they have some values. :-)
7 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael: Law 20F3: Under 1 and 2 above a player may ask concerning a single call but Law 16B1 may apply.

16B1 deals with UI from (or to in this case) partner.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True. Well, either that or the committee must have provisionally approved it.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used to do telephone tech support. I gave it up when I found myself wanting to answer the phone with "yeah, what the fsck do you want?" :-)
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're right, that's the question he should have asked — and the one you and your partner should have answered.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know why you should lose your cool, nor why there should be a lot of questions. What was the first question asked?

On the lead of the 2 6 looks pretty cold unless you get a bad trump break. What went wrong?
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depends on the rules in force Gene. Under the new rules currently under consideration, if the pair has a written defense to their convention which they have submitted to the C&C committee, but about which the committee has not yet responded, the TD has no authority to disallow it.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is unclear whether the non-claiming side disputes the claim, since they didn't say anything.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Law 68D2{b}: upon the request of the non-claiming or non-conceding side, play may continue subject to the following:
(i) all four players must concur; otherwise the Director is summoned, who then proceeds as in {a} above.

Neither claimer nor his partner can initiate playing it out. The request must come from the other side. So no, he can't do it.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Play is over unless somebody asks to play it out, and all four players concur. Nobody asked.
21 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He did claim. He didn't state a line of play. Since nobody asked him to play on, he shouldn't do that. Since neither East nor West accepted or rejected the claim in a reasonable time, he should call the director. Director's busy? Oh, well, waiting is…

I would rule he makes four, and caution him to state a line of play in future. “If I don't draw trump” isn't good enough.
21 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm in favor of politically incorrect quotations myself. :-)
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My father told me much the same thing as Donald's. Back in the early 1980s, we went to visit my Grandmother (Dad's mother). Driving past the old farm, I mentioned this tale of Dad's. Grandmother laughed and said “he walked the 50 yards out here to the road and got on the bus.” :-)
Feb. 17
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 694 695 696 697
.

Bottom Home Top