Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ethan Liu
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 13 14 15 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
where is the video? are we allowed to take a peek?
4 hours ago
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.
Indeed experience can go a long way in bridge. the fact it has a bidding phase and incomplete information, more or less puts a limit on the effectiveness of “thinking hard”.
March 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Comparing to chess, bridge is just a “game”. The decision tree of chess is far deeper and wider, and every nuance matters. No such thing as luck, any little thing you overlooked WILL cost you dearly. It is very hard for older people to still have and maintain the mental intensity required to win.
March 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 (Art. strong), 2 (0-5P, 6-7 )
6 (lazy or in bad mood)
March 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assume Jumpshift to be fit-showing.
March 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
if you think they are “decent” enough to recognize the situation, then why look for a “tell” ?
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just for fun:

2N 3
3 4
4 6

2N: 5-5+ minors, below opening strength or 20P+ at most 3 losers.
3: to play
3: strong hand, short
4: RKC for
4: refuse to answer, minimum
6: you got to love J of .
March 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeez…
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bridge is the only game requires disclosure of your methods/strategy/tactics to your opponents, which is utterly ridiculous.

Bridge probably can do better without the ban on concealed agreements, therefore also do away with the silly regulation on every bids you make.
March 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They said you can't win, and got their asses kicked badly, then they refuse to recognize your success even it is blatantly obvious. sounds familiar?
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
seriously? there are 420, 450, together with 630, 690?
March 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For me, partner makes a cue bid can only mean two things, either he doesn't know what to do, or he doesn't know what he is doing. I say my prayer, “let it be the former, Amen!”
March 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
obviously politically incorrect. LMAO.
March 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
it ain't final until the committee says so.
Oct. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMHO, anonymous “comments” have no credibility whatsoever.
Sept. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Bridge is harder than chess, or Go”? come on, be real.
Dec. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
it's about claim WITHOUT statement, or resolve any ambiguity.

suffice means suffice to win the trick, if you lead small to AQ, if the K is still outstanding, then Q does not suffice to win the trick, you must play the Ace. However, if the AQ hand is the last one to play, you may win the trick cheaply.

And yes, you must also follow lowest card, if it blocks, you will remember to claim WITH a line of play next time.

you can simply claim “drive out the ace”, what's the problem?
Nov. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As already mentioned, Rules should be written by engineers, not lawyers. Good rules should leave no room for “judgement”, even you think God is the judge. I have a humble proposal for the rule of claim:

A declarer's claim without statement of line, shall be accepted as valid, ONLY IF the stated objective can be achieved by winning tricks continuously AND with cards of the lowest rank that suffice.
Nov. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Ed.

So, declarer (or even dummy) can refuse to play on after a claim by their own side, and waiting for arbitration, which they may have reason to believe, going to be favorable?

That does not sound right to me.
Nov. 7, 2017
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 13 14 15 16
.

Bottom Home Top