Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jan Lagerman
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe the robots will not notice?
April 26, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have always wondered by this void showing + number of aces.
Because in Sweden, bids on the 6th level show 2 and void in the bid suit.
But if I refused to show my shortness last round, why would I do it now?
April 26, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know there was a short recording of Belladonna and Garozzo taken for the swedish news during BB 1983.
Most likely, if there was anything, just a minute or two, perhaps even less than that.
The swedish TD told me this short clip might have lost the title for Italy in favour of US.
Because when the TV cameras, TV people and all the cables for lamps etc etc suddenly entered the playing room Garozzo misunderstood a call from the other side of the screen and Italy lost the board because of this confusion, and the diff was larger than the diff when the match ended.

I doubt there is a chance to find the clip (if there ever was one) and I even doubt it is of any intrest at all.
April 26, 2019
Jan Lagerman edited this comment April 26, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My good friend PO Sundelin always tells our team to NEVER use names of conventions.
This when explaining, write on the CC, or perhaps even when asking opps.
Not sure if he means Lightner in this context,but he has a point worth to remember.
April 25, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This topic reminds me of my first bridge trip to US.
Von Zedtwits pairs in Washington DC 2009.
A very well known wold champion italian was declaring.

He was in 6hearts and the trump suit was something like:

AJ7x

K8xx

They had a bidding misunderstanding and the last few bids were not in control.

West led a trump.
Vwkwc declarer played low and the queen came from RHO.
Now another trump and west followed low again.

I think his thought process was something that reminds of the OP.
-:"Who is this east? Would he play the queen from QT or Q9?

2. Some players always wants to do something tricky.
If East on the OP deal playes high-low in trumps (usually odd number), it might against theese ‘tricksters’, be a reason to belive they have Hxxx and finess.
April 25, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The TORPAR convention must do well on some boards.
April 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True. But 55 majors (admittedly rare) must do something clever too. (Pass maybe)
April 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So a 5-4-2-2 hand is described as a 5S4D hand?
April 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If we have 5Sp and 4H and they open 1H? What do we do then if we want to overcall?
April 20, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
page 23 has a Avarelli Pabis-T mixup
April 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“In Reese's book Master Play, one of the best chapters is Playing on an Assumption.”

Held a class on that theme last week.
It is one of my favourite classes for players who left the beginners lvl, starting to climb up further.
I usually use Reese's 3sp or 4sp example hand. It is a great lesson.
April 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think Mike Lawrence and Eddie Kantar defended a contract this way by discarding and discarding and discarding … until partner got the setting ruff. Was it 1990?
Any way, it is worth to remember such a play.
April 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So Jerry was wrong about the pre-alert?

He wrote in his post:
“Before the beginning of the 1st set we DID our normal prealert procedure (as in each match we play) - verbally and by presenting defense sheets, duly printed out from the ACBL defense database.”

It seems the provided defence was the wrong one, but ‘the defence paper’ was not read by NS.

Jerry wrote:
“But he simply didn’t want to use it. I don’t know why. He just bid 4s. ”

So IF what Jerry wrote is true, it would not have mattered if the provided defence was the right one or not.
Perhaps that in turn does not matter, but that seems a bit peculiar to me.
March 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Tell ‘em what you play. Or suffer. ”

But here EW did tell. And provided a defence.

In Albuquerque there was nothing like that. The conventional 1NT was not even on the convention card as you said, and I do not think pre-alerts were in use (1994).

It seems you are suggesting a pre-alerted call (admittedly only in the first set if Jerry is right) including ACBLs suggested defence should be compared with a ’secret' convention not on the cc.

In Albuquerque there was this sitiation:

1H (1NT*) 3NT (4S) *=4Sp 5+minor

Opener was now wondering if 1NT should be treated as a 1S overcall (where 3NT was natural) or an artificial call (where 3NT was heart support). They had no time or possibility to prepare this sequence in advance and opener ‘guessed’ wrong.
(I was told this by the 1H opener. I was supposed to play in that team, but I got married some months before and was with my wife during the tournament)

In Memphis 2019 NS had a provided defence on the table (if Jerry ir right) and were pre-alerted about the bid before the first board of the match.

I have a problem comparing the two cases as similar.
But if one tells me they are the same, I ofc may rethink.
March 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So NS were pre-alerted. Even if not before the last set.

Is not pre-alerts the tool used to prevent opponents from beeing surprised and not properly prepared for a perhaps strange to them opening call?
If the pre-alert was at the beginning of the match or at the beginning of the set really does not affect that much, does it? At least I would not be surprised myself.

So if beeing prealerted at the beginning of the match eliminates the surprise moment (as I think it does, at least to some extent), then perhaps only the ‘uncomfort’ or ‘unfamiliary’ of having to read the defence papers remains.

But if the defence papers are not read, but the player(s) act without using them, I have problems how they could ask for compentation. Ofc they could, but I wonder how the regulations or laws look at it. And how the TD should handle it when the suggested defence is not used. This ofc also includes the problem when the suggested defence is wrong, as it apparently was in this case.
March 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I admit I would too. On some of those 100% perhaps even a grand, even if I also admit that is not very likely.
March 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“ in which case slam would easily be reached.”

Could easily be reached?
March 31, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know many do. But with that hand you can always splinter or raise hearts. Bidding spades (1 or 2) with 3 of them is begging for trouble and if my prtner raises spades, it will be very difficult to get somewhere else.
March 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
'Very conservative' is an understatement. :)
March 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my book 4D shows a very powerful 3-7 hand.
March 22, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top