Join Bridge Winners
All comments by James Logan
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT - while not a great description of the hand, you are ready for partner's next bid, passing either 3-level red suit bid, and probably raising any black suit bid to game.
Aug. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In this context, I think it clear to bid a non-serious 4C control bid. But I do not think that South needs to bid this way, extras or not. How about just 2S confirming spades that now allows opener to bid 3C. South will now know that I am at least 5-4-1-3, and he can go control bidding. Serious 3NT is still on in these sequences. Partner will only bid 3D with the Ace.
May 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are clubs allowed to use of these charts at any time from now on? I am thinking that pairs might like to practice using the new latitude offered in the Open or Open+ chart before Day One of the Nationals.
March 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did notice - 2nd is quite an achievement in any case. Full Kudos.
March 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One day it was going to happen - that day arrived today. Congrats, Brad!
March 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can endorse the methods in BFUN as well. You can play the canape core with 12-15 point NT along with either the relay system over the Big Club as the author proposes, but you could also use another Big Club structure that might be more familiar to you, such as what you use in Precision for example. Last - the author also has a simplified Big Club structure for those adverse to the memory requirements of relays.
Feb. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not like to make partner sit for a long time deciding what my bid may mean. In this case, he cannot misinterpret 5D as wanting to play in a different suit. As for level, I cannot think of an intelligent way to continue especially when we are unsure of our bids in the first place. 4H may be right, and I also feel that partner will pass that bid. But if he has only 3 of them, ruffing spades in the long hand does not appeal. If I were playing negative doubles here, that seems like the best choice.
Oct. 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have there been any drafts of a new Alert Chart?
Aug. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, I don't. I think that if someone is using a text to learn from, be it Hardy, be it Grant, be it Ricker, be it Cohen, that the restricted chart not blindside a pair. That being said, I think this chart is good for newcomer games, but not Gold Rush events.
March 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed - I agree with that type of configuration. Especially using the new Chart #3 as the GCC. OK, a few additions or exceptions maybe, but in general it is not too bad. Also, this corrects the issue, as I see it, to group newcomers in with Gold rush players. I just cannot, for the life of me, see why Gold Rush has to use such a restrictive chart.
March 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have no problem with any restrictive chart when it comes to newcomer games. Maybe 199er as well. But Gold Rush? Why should there be any restrictions over and above the GCC? I also believe that the GCC should be way less restrictive than it is. It is hard to believe that some 2-level openings allowed in UK novice games are restricted in GCC events now. I wonder - if the level 3 chart as presented in this column was presented as the GCC, would it be considered too restricted by many in this forum?

One other thought - why don't you just restrict the game? Say have a pairs event where only 2/1 and Standard American is allowed. Everyone playing in that should feel more or less comfortable no matter what advanced conventions are being thrown at them. You want to play Precision? Just play in a stratified or open event.
March 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I certainly don't expect to see language referencing specific works, but I would expect that the entirety of one of the founding texts on 2/1 be allowed in Intermediate/Gold Rush events.
March 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see why you restrict any event that awards gold points to something less than the GCC. The other thing I don't understand is why these charts seem to written in code. How about saying 2/1 a la Hardy or Lawrence is OK, as well as Precision as described in Precision 101 or Precision Today. Romex and canape can be skipped until the GCC, although you would get no argument from me if you wanted to include them as well. Once you get that framework understood, you can include/exclude whatever conventions you feel are too disruptive for a novice/intermediate game.
March 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Judging by the response to this proposed Midchart guideline, I can hardly wait to see comments on a new GCC. I can only hope that it is less restrictive than the current form, and more in line with international standards of bidding. For example, the English Bridge Union Blue Book, recently updated in August of 2016, Level 2 - conventions allowed in Novice games. Are there reasons why any of those allowed treatments should not be allowed under the ACBL GCC? Or worse yet, disallowed under Midchart. Refer to 6D1 of the Blue Book, referring to 2-level opening bids : “Any opening that shows 4+ cards in the suit opened is allowed”. This is at odds with the proposed Midchart rules 12 & 13.
Dec. 31, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A further question along this same type opening - say the the 2D opening can be how Richard explains it OR a simple weak 2-bid in diamonds. Allowed?
Dec. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So then there are two issues - 1) A declarer intentionally trying to gain advantage is possible as long as it is done infrequently enough that no one notices; it is up to the defenders to be the watchdog for such action, and 2) There is evidently no penalty for Dummy mentioning that declarer should be leading from hand rather than dummy AFTER the fact. If there is no penalty, why not just keep doing it? Again a defender may have to call the Director to preserve their rights as Declarer, more times than not, simply corrects his lead.

It seems to me that the defenders need to be diligent. Although no more so than noticing someone following suit after (s)he hadn't previously.

By the way, what type of Procedural Penalty do you think is appropriate for the devious Declarer who leads from the wrong hand often and is suspected of cheating? Maybe it should automatically be assessed if it occurs twice in a session, without considering intent.

Or we can say it is much ado about nothing.
Aug. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What can be done about a declarer who knowingly leads a card from dummy when, for instance, he has no dummy entry but wants to take a finesse. Or has one entry but needs to finesse twice? I suspect some beginners might let him get away with this as there is a certain fear in calling the director. This law assumes that no one is cheating, but we now know better.
Aug. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have been playing the OS for almost 6 months now. Sure, you have to get used to it, but so do the opponents.
May 13, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
6 as I am more afraid of a club ruff playing in hearts than a heart ruff playing in clubs. Partner can always correct as I was willing to sign off in hearts.
Nov. 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Double …. Easiest problem in days.
July 29, 2014
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top