Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Adams
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 505 506 507 508
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Montana allows 4 of 6 is an example of simple majority.
Quite a few states are 9 of 12 or 3/4.

Tennessee allows simple majority on a 12 person jury.

So my original statement is overstatement. (no surprise, I like to overstate for effect).
an hour ago
John Adams edited this comment an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I tried 3N. k onside and I do pretty well. Offside and I will be glad to have found a contract they can't double easily.
22 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We can make game opposite cheese and favorable breaks.

Kxxx x xxxx Kxxx

Ax of spades onside and I lose 1 spade, 1 diamond, 1 club.

Axxx x xxx Kxxxx is odds on for game and might take 11 tricks.

Some hands with more points that don't mesh as well will have no play.

Partner won't be able to work out what's needed, so I just bid it.

I have some sympathy for 3. 2 bidders should join UA.
Nov. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The same holds for an AK. You have to pick one of them though.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
West's lead is fine. trick 3 suit pref for hearts does not ask partner to shift to spades. What the heck was East thinking? West might to better to shift to a heart a trick 2, but the timing problem to get all the uppercuts not easy to see.

South's problem is harder. Seems like everyone bids on this garbage. I discourage it, I set up the hands so they go for 1100, I give them the same hand the following week and they still do it. Good news, they have lots of company.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hmm.

So I would have thought the WBF ban only applied to WBF events. I would have thought it a somewhat redundant ban because the WBF can already exclude members from it's events without specifying cause.

I would have thought the NBOs each make their own decision, and that an NBO that chooses to extend the WBF ban was doing so under it's own authority rather than the WBFs.

So, if the WBF issued a direct ban on events outside WBF sponsorship, then I immediately concede your point.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. That's the purpose of playing non-forcing NTs. If it's your habit to pass all balanced minimums, you are playing a non-forcing NT and misleading your opponents when you call it semi-forcing.

Semi-forcing is so that you can pass hands like:

QJx Qxxxx KJx Kx (for those that would not open this, make the Spade Q the King).

Semi-forcing means you are supposed to bid most of the time.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With no bidding, Ace then low to Queen seems right. And you should play the Q even if RHO produces the Jack or Ten on the 2nd round (a form of restricted choice).
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Henk, can you show us the WBF rules that say this?

I have seen this claim repeated many times, but the link provided in this thread for the WBF rules has provisions for the WBF barring individuals.

I would think the judges must have had other cause than this, or maybe we are looking at the wrong set of rules?
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The intra-finesse is not as good as playing for the king onside if it might be. It is better than playing for Kx offsides though, especially with the preempt.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I show this as an invitational hand in diamonds.

Playing 2/1 that means jumping to 3 Diamonds.
Otherwise it's bidding 2 then 3.

1N followed by 3 over 2 is weak, not invitational. I am too good for that.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, so if you don't think it's on your left, what was your plan when you lead the Ace and see the Ten on your right on the 2nd round? I thought your above statement implied you might duck this playing for Kx on right and JTx on your left.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You may well be right, however I will cite my source.

http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-system/must-all-jury-verdicts-be-unanimous.html

Specifically:

State Court Jury Verdicts: Unanimity Not Always Required

In state courts, whether a jury needs to be unanimous depends on the state and the type of trial. For criminal trials, nearly every state requires the jury to produce a unanimous verdict.

For civil trials, almost one-third of states only require a majority for a verdict. Some states require a majority if the money at issue in the trial is below a certain amount, and a unanimous verdict all other times.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1!n 2
2 3
3N ?

Seems like the start to the auction on David's sample hand.

Getting club support and being able to bid RKC for clubs not playing kickback is going to be very tricky.. Especially since many pairs don't use 4N as RKC for clubs even not playing kickback.

Would like to see followup ideas on handling this start. Texas has the advantage of giving us an auction with no ambiguity. Texas, RKC, King ask - Result.

Other possible hands for partner:

Ax Axx KQJxx xxx = 13 tricks in NT, that partner won't be able to visualize unless we Texas.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Leonard, If you think the King is on your left, the best play for one trump loser is the intra-finesse. It's a cool play and a good bit more likely than Ace and another guessing to duck or not. Rodwell wrote about this play in his fantastic book, “Rodwell Files.” Had you considered this play in your assessment?
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
and a worse idea after you have asked them to shuffle, play, and duplicate the board first.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Art, I think it depends on the state.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2/3 is a 2 to 1 majority. A civil jury needs a simple majority.

2/3 is a 67% game.. but it's good to encourage the “C” player with the 33%.. “Hey, it was closer to 50% than to 0!”

Don't feel bad. I got shouted down on the German Dr's cheating thread. We can't win em all. You are beating a dead horse in this one.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, then you can ask them to enter the boards into the bridgemates too!
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I never see good results from players that wait until the 4th round to show primary support for partner.

I expect partner for this auction should be 1264 with enough extras to risk 4N opposite the misfit. Since I too have extras, will as partner to pick a slam in case we are having a misunderstanding. If partner thinks 2 with void, fine we will get to 6.
Nov. 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 505 506 507 508
.

Bottom Home Top