Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Portwood
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 173 174 175 176
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You don't have to summon the director (unless the RA inists on it) - just ask opponents if they agree that one of them has paused and say you reserve the right to call the TD if it appears that their partner makes use of it. (If you do call the TD, he's just going to tell you to play on and call him back if you feel you have been disadvantaged - mind you, I'd keep an eye on the table if I can, just in case).
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If South takes away the King his partner used for protection then he has 11 or so points - which suggests a 2NT raise (ASSUMING NOT CONVENTIONAL). The J is also a very good working card on the bidding.
22 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Oh well - next time I'll put a couple of smiley icons round it.
Jan. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just ask them to turn their hearing aids off then!
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
commonly known as CHO (Centre Hand Opponent).

My original comment about what to do if someone says “no agreement” has been commented on privately, with the recommendation that you call the director who can send both players away in turn while you ask their partner questions.
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry Henrik - I was meaning the OP (the minor suit 2 not the KX situation - of which I agree).
Jan. 19
2NT
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Story from Richard Lighton

“I was in the hospitality suite at a local regional a few years ago, and a group were discussing Barry Crane. Someone asked ”Why, with his superlative technique, was Barry not more successful at teams play?“ ”+5, +5, +5, -17."

https://www.blakjak.org/crane.htm
Jan. 19
2NT
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since it seems to be going down two thirds of the time - it is surely odds on that the next time you do it, it won't work :)
Jan. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1a) What do you think 3 means?

If your agreement is alertable then you alert it and give your opponents the correct partnership explanation. In any case you must still treat it as if partner has bid 3 over your call showing both majors, “carefully avoiding” taking advantage of the failure to alert (73C)

1b) opponents have been given misleading information - you must call the director at the right time - which if you are declaring is at the end of the auction, but if defending at the end of play.(Law 20F5b) You then give the correct explantion (which is UI for your partner).(+ a lot of other stuff that has been recorded elsewhere and I am too lazy to reiterate).

2)You could ask them what their doubles over calls that do not show the denomination bid usually do mean (they should tell you this anyway under 20F1) and what would a 2 overcall mean (and in fact you could ask them about pretty much any call they might in theory make). You could look at their system card, which may give further information. Otherwise I would call the TD at the end of the hand and ask for the hand to be recorded as I can't believe a regular partnership wouldn't have discussed defence to a precision club.

3) With regard to asking questions. You have the right when it is your turn to call or play to ask for a full explanation of the auction, or you may ask about a single call. In each case the law makes clear that UI may be the result. My advice would be to a) always ask about alerted calls. If you don't then b) once you ask about one alerted call, or the auction to that point - keep asking. c) Never stop a player from completing their explanation of the auction. Asking and then passing only provides UI if partner knows you would only ask if the answer would affect your call or if you have interest in the denomination bid.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He makes a ruling that allows the event to carry on.

Mind you - on reading 50E4, I don't think it applies. The OS didn't gain any assistance from the minor penalty card in any way, did they?
Jan. 18
2NT
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In “Winning No trump leads” Bird & Anthias simulations on the hands chosen (selection bias maybe) indicate

55% 85% 72% 70% 65% 65% 74% 56% 79% 56% 54% and 60%

(figures not exact and generally speaking the top %ge is not shown)

The recommended method is: be passive
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well you have also pre-empted two opponents - and if partner only has a 1-level call available a) you might not respond over 1 and b) opponents are probably good for a decent partial.

As we all know - bridge is a game of information. The best tactics are therefore to exchange information with your partner and make it harder/ more risky for opponents to do the same.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The laws state that you have to adjudicate as if the major penalty card had not existed - so you have a situation where with KX the player might have jumped in with the King (crashing partner's Ace) or might not. A poor player would always jump in with the King - and hence the score adjusted 100% on that basis, a good player might not - and hence get a better score reflecting his better ability.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(It should have been a ‘laughing’ “no”.)

I'll leave that comment above - and refer you to Law 74B2
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Since the beginning of bridge no one has a good example?”

You are in a competitive auction: opponents bid 4 slowly over a 4 call and, since you want a top, you make an unjustified leap to 6 confident that if you go down you will get an adjustment to 4 +1.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was under “LAW 89 ‐ RECTIFICATION IN INDIVIDUAL EVENTS” but IIRC it said that

“After execution the Director may
i) replace the pair with a substitute pair
ii) replace the executed player with a substitute
iii take over the place of the executed player (Law 16C applies)”
iv disqualify the pair and issue an artificial adjusted score of AV+, AV- in any future rounds (Law 12C)"
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I directed a 13-table double-pivot mixed teams of four event (which is another way of saying - “There must be at least one male,one female and everyone plays with everyone else”) earlier this month. I had one call for an insufficeint bid and decided to move the boards manually for a couple of rounds (EW up 1 boards down 6, is not intuitive).

The only problem was at tea when some players decided to get their food early. I did decide to announce that players getting food were in breach of law 74 (leaving table unnecessarily before the TD announced the end of the round), but since it was the season of goodwill I wan't going to further punish them. (I gather there were some comments made to the DIC - maybe I should have announced that tea was after this round and request players to remain at the table until the round was called)

If you think that was churlish - well there were still hands in progress (the same set of boards was used for the whole 12 rounds) and I knew that tablecloths were being put out before food was to be served.

The laws themselves state that Bridge has to be played in strict compliance with the laws, and I was seriously concerned before the event (marketed as being a ‘fun event’) in case I had to make a contentious ruling.
Jan. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It does - because if you guess wrong you get no restitution, but if you guess right it seems to be a weighted score (presumably initially 60-40 against you). What also makes it bad is that a good player (one who would seriously consider NOT going up with the King) would get punished more than one who always would!

And I think law 15 is worse. (Unless you want a quick cigarette/ toilet break)
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David has mentioned this once, twice or 100 times before - there is a paradox in law 50 you can make use of the information, but if you gain from such use it will be taken away. However you have to read E4 more carefully.

“…he shall award an adjusted score. In his adjustment he should seek to recover as nearly as possible the probable outcome of the board without the effect of the penalty card(s).”

Thus if you have KX and dummy Qx and decalarer knows you have the King from the bidding (and you know declarer knows that) you would fly in with the King anyway - so there would be no adjustment under circumstances( c) since that is what would happen under circumstance (a).
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No Ray - I meant what I said - that is my opinion. If someone with a more thorough understanding of the laws than me (and there are plenty that frequent this site) are of the opinion that you aren't forbidden from ignoring the suit preference signal then I will change my mind.
Jan. 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 173 174 175 176
.

Bottom Home Top