Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jan Lagerman
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And a disadvantage is ofc that 2 does not promise support. Breaking the ‘first rule’ to support with support is often a huge disadvantage.
Dec. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Funny. I never heard of Robert the Bruce until a few days ago when there was a TV program about that battle vs the English in a history channel. The program was quite good. Two historians telling about the two day battle, the participants and also showed were they tried to find the exact place where the fight was fought.
And now I read about them here. Most likely a coincidence, but is it not strange how often rare things queue up as soon you spot them the first time?
Dec. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I found an early psyche from the World Final 1953 in New York

- 872 JT32 T87643 Opened 1 in first hand
Next said 1(!) on QT AKJ Q9654 QJ5
Responder held J9742 4 A87 AK92 bid 1
Advancer jumped to 6 with AK8653 QT9653 K -
All psss
Dec. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Avon: Thx. Board 198 (OP) perhaps also should be included.
But thx again for your effort. I agree that as soon there is bidding, the method seems to get into big trouble often enough. Far more than the records show it did.
Dec. 23, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Avon: Sry if I was not clear. What I was after was if those who tried off shape T/O doubles and failed badly, did so ‘back then’ or in the modern era when competition is a lot more fierce and occurs a lot more often. This by third hand after the T/O, and perhaps also by opener if advancer took action.
Dec. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Avon:

“- no one plays them now
- pairs that played them found them disastrous
- they were dropped when the screens went up”

Is it possible that those methods worked better back then?
Today, when competition is a lot more fierce than it was back then, the methods perhaps do not work as well?

In one of the deals Mr Yates showed there was 1H X 3H
The american pair played this as invitational according to the OP.
Today I think hardly anyone playes 1H X 3H as invitational, rather it is preemptive.

In what environment did the pairs that found them disastrous play? Todays environment or yesterdays?
Dec. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
#198

3 vulnerable on a 5-1 fit and 13 to 8 hcp.

I think I have read on BW somewhere that Italy never ended up badly after an offshape TO double.
That seems to be a false observation unless there is something I did not understand.
Dec. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Max: In your opinion, how much does the comment affect this?
It seems to me that some people do not mention it at all. Just the UI.
Others who mention it, think it is crusial.
Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems to me that this should be quite easy to solve.
Apparently it is not.

1) Assume the pause + pass strongly indicates a diamond lead (I'm personally not sure it does, but let's assume it does) I do believe most people here on BW agree the diamond lead is a no no. (Some may think a diamond lead is the only logical lead with or without a pause. I personally do not agree with theese people)

If that was the only issue, the outcome of the appeal seems correct.

2) Then comes the comment from east into the picture.
Does it affect the ruling? Or is 1 the only consideration that must be looked at?

Suppose the comment was -:“Damn, we are off the diamond ace.”
It wasn't. It was “Maybe I should not have done that because partner might be void.” Let us assume theese are the same. (I do not think they are, but let's assume they are)

Would North then be allowed to lead one despite the UI from 1?

Does 2 cancell 1, or is 1 the only thing to consider as 2 is a result of the UI in 1?

I have seen a lot of reasoning and educated comments about this ruling.
Those who belive the ruling was fine, seems to think 2 should not be considered, as it follows and is a result of 1, and because of 1 a diamond lead is not allowed.
Those who think 2 must come into the picture believe the diamond lead now is the only logical lead, partly or only because of the comment.

If our laws are so complicated that rational and good players can not agree if 2 is valid or not, they seem to be to complicated.
Dec. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why not simply ask for aces? In my book 4NT here is RKCB. If someone playes it as natural, how strong is is then?
Dec. 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Patrik: From Davids translation “If with 5 cards you return the original second highest, it will probably cause confusion with returning the higher of a remaining doubleton.”

A remaining doubleton means then that declarer had 5 from start. While it is possible, it is highly unlikely.
Nov. 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The 5 is very dangerous. Partner might play us for A95xx. He probably knows we do not have 3 cards.
Nov. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Last round in a MP event. A very well known worldclass player was playing 4H, a standard +1 contract. Strangely enough a lot of players who had finished the round came about, and they stayed watching.
VWKWP remarked -:“I wonder if suits break on this board”

I remember Zia writing about a deal from long ago.
Two unknown swedish players at his table and Zia wonders how good they are, as this might influence his play.
-:"Do you know PO Sundelin?
Death silence.
After the deal Zia kicked himself.
They had kibitzers! They must be good!!

Many years ago in a team event someone in 6S was thinking hard how to play KT AQ9xxx in trumps for no losers.
The player after KT had made a vulnerable preempt of 3C, so a direct finess with the ten was what declarer was thinking about.
Two good friends who had played the board came walking over, and when they saw the deal and position they immidiately realised the situation. Should they stay, or shoud they leave?
They solved it pretty good. One player left and one stayed watching.
Nov. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why not show the club support and stiff spade with one bid?
Nov. 17, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some years ago I played the New Years Pairs in Stockholm on January 1st.
Its a funny game with a lot of tired players.
Playing with Mikael R against Ola R on the first board, Mikael led a low spade to my King and declarers Queen! Nice I thought, we have 5 spade tricks so I led back a spade to declarers Ace!!! If you wonder why Ola played like that, I can report he was dummy.

Later that day another declarer had:

Kxx

AK9x

It was known he had 4 diamonds in hand. He took the ace and when he played low to the king I dropped the Jack from Jxx. This usually do not work, but this was the New Years Pairs were you take any chance you can, and this time declarer finessed the 9 next trick.
Nov. 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a class for inexperienced players the following trumpsuit came up.

Txxx

AK8xx

Before class I wrote a paper with some information how this deal should be bid and how the play would go.
I wrote “on this deal everybody will bid 4H and take 12 tricks”. (Little did I know)
Well everybody did bid 4H but one declarer took only 11 tricks.
That was my assistant who played at one table as there was uneven number of players.
To my horror I watched an old lady play the 9 from 9x as east when declarer started trumps from the table, and her husband dropped the queen (from QJ).
Declarers (the assistant) eyes flashed as he now had a sure top, reentering dummy and finessing in hearts with the 8, expecting that the 9 was from J9x. This is not uncommon in classes, but not this time. :)
Nov. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you expect 1NT to go down with a club lead, why not double? Clubs is (by far IMO) the likely lead IF you double.
Nov. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I read The Expertgame many years ago, and the translator (Jannersten?) translated winkle with ‘mussla’ which, I was told, is a clam. Somehow the defenders are caught in the grip of a clam.
No swede (but me) says mussel squeeze. They all call it winkle squeeze, or winkleskvis. In Swedish W is a rare letter, so vinkelskvis might be seen also, but ‘vinkel’ in swedish means angle, so that name is weird.
Nov. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Sweden it is called ‘The Witch’ (Häxan) after Magnus Lindqvists X-girlfriend.
Nov. 2, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That pass is very strange. Perhaps even If the double was a strong balanced hand or penalty.
Oct. 18, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top