Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ian Wilson
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15 16 17 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Amen to that. Have never forgotten gruelling GNT District Final in Buellton. Bringing home a grand on a trump coup .. until I discarded a small trump on one of reentryless dummy's winners .. Since then I obsessively check that the card I am playing is the card I think I am playing.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A slight modification would make this a completely usable scheme: when a partnership registers, they proffer one convention card. The seller of entries makes 2 copies of the proffered CC, with some official stamp to indicate their registration; then the pair takes one registered copy each and plays the event. A pair that does not proffer a prototype card gets 2 copies of the Yellow Card as a default. Shazzam!
Oct. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just to clarify: the ACBL requires that we prealert the system, and alert the second bid in a possible canape sequence, e.g. in the 1-1N-2, the 2 bid must be alerted.
Sept. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
after the 2 relay, 2N shows any upper range;
then after the 3 relay, 3N shows top range.
On reflection, I can see some, er, slight problems with this.
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This structure easily extends to 3 ranges, e.g.
10-12, 13-15, 16-18. (Not my idea, came across it and
it seemed like A Good Thing).
Aug. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
tangentially related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowclone
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For reasons I don't fully understand, I feel less comfortable psyching online than I do at the table.

Favorite psyche story: George Winter directing. I psyche a strong NT, end up in some doubled spade partscore, making, on unspeakable defence. George calls me over: “don't do that next Thursday”. “?”. “I won't be here next Thursday and wouldn't want to miss it”.

I think this means that one egregious psyche per week was OK while George was around to enjoy them :)
July 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FFR, according to the OED, the three commonly used
plurals for ‘platypus’ are correct:
- platypodes (the *most correct* form, a Greek plural for a Greek word)
- platypi (would be correct were platypus Latin, which it isn't)
- platypuses (the “English” form)
July 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree - Precision and Blue are philosophically quite different.
Put another way, someone who likes playing Blue is not necessarily someone who likes playing Precision.
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Think I came across one, once .. “what does that show?” “majors unless it's a weak NT” “then what?” “something ellis”.
July 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just in case you thought I was asleep - I am shocked.
July 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
S has a max and a double fit after 3 from partner.
Should drive to slam after this.
May 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surely you aren't omitting Bludgeon, are you, Paul?
Oh .. “serious”. Hmmm.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The first board looks a lot more like an 11-count than a 10-count to me. I think the stated 11-15 range is a better description for opps (I am sure there are many 10 counts that you don't upgrade).

The second board seems pretty standard these days.
April 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
..not to mention the choice of test revealing more about the interrogator than the subject-apparent..
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Recently I have noticed the scorekeeper consulting the Bridgemate during the play when declarer. While declarer is entitled to know what the contract is, I assume that looking at the Bridgemate is illegal since
a) declarer's right to ask is state-dependent (perhaps, depending on the placement of the comma, above
b) the Bridgemates display the lead (I think), clearly not something anyone is entitled to see during most of the hand
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
..the fourth answer in Master Solvers'.
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Positively grotesque is a personal best for me :)
April 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think I misread my notes, and that 65% is correct (100-35).
April 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought it might be interesting to look at the a priori probability of partner's hand holding enough relevant cards for a slam to be likely. The ‘relevant cards’ are A, K, K*. If dummy shows up with 2 (or more) of these then slam is reasonable (provided that dummy also provides “enough” trumps).

Referring to the mighty TABLE 26 of Borel & Cheron, we find that the probability of dummy's containing 2 relevant cards when the other 3 hands contain 3 relevant cards is about 22%. The chance that dummy will also provide at least 2 trumps is somewhat less than 35%.

Together the chance of finding the right cards in dummy to make 12 tricks (or more) is about 8%. So I am not sure that opening 4h (assuming we won't now find slam) is particularly poor compared to either:
a) opening 1h and playing it there, or
b) opponents' being able to compete effectively in spades

* there are other ‘relevant cards’ such as the Q. But these are not relevant unless coupled with a late entry, so I think are infrequent enough to ignore for purposes of forming a rough estimate.
April 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15 16 17 18
.

Bottom Home Top