Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ken Gamble
1 2 3 4 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Shuffle all effected the decks. Afterwards, the Dealer4 machine can read in the shuffled hands and produce a pbn file. This file can then go through normal post game processing.
Dec. 25, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So opener's if 1 call is natural, then 2 would be a limit raise or constructive raise in diamonds? Anyway for making a non-constructive raise in diamonds?
Dec. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My understanding was the LHO didn't accept the change.
Dec. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The first 13 names are from Bridgebum.com and I assume they are not bogus names. Since I needed names in order to add methods to the list, the rest may be bogus.

The purposes of this poll were to:
(1) look at the popularity of each escape.
(2) learn the various methods players have employed.

I have no idea which of those listed having zero counts are now obsolete due to better methods.
Dec. 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For those who haven't taken their recovering name-dropper training, I've add two more escapes to the list: Hinden and Shannon Cappelletti Escapes.

My understanding of Shannon's method is (correct me if I'm wrong):
o pass is neutral.
o Either partner can show their one or two-suited hands by
Redoubling or bidding the lower of their suits (DONT).
o If the two-suiter option is initiated, the neutral partner will choose which one.
Dec. 6, 2017
Ken Gamble edited this comment Dec. 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1)How do you handle non-touching 4-card suits.
2) If you pass, does the 1NT bidder use Suction to show his long suit?
Dec. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is the wriggle suit bid, alertable?
Dec. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With case 2, do you XX then bid 2S or XX then 2H to transfer to spades?
Dec. 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the early 90's, Billy Miller had a Calcutta event comprising of the Bay Area's finehst players. I remember Hug was auctioned off at a very steep price, well beyond my means. I was able to kibitz him for awhile and was amazed how simple his card was.

Don't remember where he ended in the final standings. I think his partner was Peter Pender but could be wrong about this.
Nov. 21, 2017
Ken Gamble edited this comment Nov. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Got it. Thanks
Nov. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
21B. Call Based on Misinformation from an Opponent
1. (a) Until the end of the auction period …

I am confused with the above wording. Isn't the auction period over after 3 passes?
Nov. 21, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BTW, the 3D contract produced a bottom. The responder had xx xx KJTxxx KQJ.

The player had under 100 mpts and would have been perplexed to figure out what a comparable response would be under the pressures of the moment. With guidance she may have understood a pass or double might allow her partner to continue the auction. But as mentioned above somewhere, the director could not be too explicit in explaining her choices.

Also, the director is relatively new and I'm sure this is his first case concerning comparable bids.
Nov. 14, 2017
Ken Gamble edited this comment Nov. 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Knowing this pair, they aren't playing control or transfer bids. But how would you rule if they did?
Nov. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wasn't at the game, but I think the director was called at the time the 2D bid was made. Responder then bid 3D. I changed the OP statement.
Nov. 12, 2017
Ken Gamble edited this comment Nov. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Law 27B.(b)
if the insuffcient bid is corrected with a comparable call (see Law
23A) the auction proceeds without further rectification.

So the question centers around the 3D natural response being comparable to a 2D waiting response. I can't understand why a bid showing a long diamond suit is not a subset of “any possible holding”.



Correction - removed sentence about double,
Nov. 12, 2017
Ken Gamble edited this comment Nov. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I ran some computer simulations for a 2S West contract. With both club and spade leads, I get -140.

Our club has small games so it might be difficult to get enough players to conduct a poll. Would you run computer simulations in lieu of a poll?

I used a computer bridge program for these simulations. I wonder if this is acceptable for obtaining a weighted adjustment. The advantage is that the director can make the runs during the game so players don't have to wait around.
Nov. 2, 2017
Ken Gamble edited this comment Nov. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Afterwards, East commented to North (flt-B player) that a better option is to pass which forces South to redouble or bid a long suit. If redouble is done, then North can now bid the lower of non-touching suits or pass.
In this case, I guess North would bid 2D. I don't know how the auction continues but EW would probably be doubling on further bids.
Nov. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
East/West are very strong players but had not played that long together. East said that the double showed a two-suiter but he forgot to alert.
Nov. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The PAR results were:
EW: 2, 2, 2, 2, 3NT
NS: (5), (5), (5), (4), (NT4)
Nov. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can anyone point to any of the 10 examples that may have a different ruling with the 2017 laws?

I was surprised that many of the rulings took a less draconian interpretation than I expected. I see:
“intent is incontrovertible”, “cannot be reasonable to think he is doing anything but…”, “Declarer has solved the bridge problem here”, “Here the line of play is so clear that …”, “His intent is clear and incontrovertible”.
Oct. 31, 2017
1 2 3 4 5
.

Bottom Home Top