Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Kyle Rockoff
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you're playing the X as forcing (i.e. not penalty-oriented), yes it seems like the mindset should be that partner could be choosing X with either the option 2 or option 3 hand.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess Values is supposed to also be an in-between Penalty and T/O– also including a subset of balanced hands that may prefer to defend 3Sx then straight up bid 3NT.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just had a friend privately suggest to me a new option (Do something intelligent). Added it to the poll for any late-comers or people who might want to change their mind.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There probably is more overlap. The difference is more what mindset overcaller (the initial doubler) should have when seeing the double. Option 2 is more geared towards “partner is probably a balanced hand with no spade stopper that's stuck”, versus option 3 is more the mindset of a more unbalanced hand, quick tricks, and partial stopper in spades looking for 3NT. In the end, it looks like the consensus might be that overcaller should be thinking “yes” to both 2 and 3– which is probably the insight I was looking to find when making this poll.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would probably guess pick-a-minor without discussion? Though I guess 4 kind of forces the same thing (certainly partner isn't going to bypass both minors and 4NT to bid 5), though perhaps 4 would be more oriented towards “Show me a control”– not 100% confident what would be most efficient. I'm curious too.
March 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree 4's isn't very logical (unless the T/O doubler made the rare case of dbl-ing with 5 bad hearts). Updated the Responsive takeout option to attempt to specify this.
March 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As strong as this hand is, its value comes from a heart fit. X by hearts should have more hard values. Michaels is a distortion, wouldn't be my call. I would invite after any raise of hearts.
March 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Historically if anyone probably Helen Sobel Smith, though idk if extending this father/mother analogy makes a whole lot of sense.
March 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And yes an 8-15 1NT is probably the most junior 1NT bid ever :-)
March 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not a fan of the changes to 1NT openings in general with the new chart, though i know they’re trying to make it reasonable for the average player. RIP 3rd seat 8-15 1NT.
March 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's 100% general chart and a fairly common conventional treatment of 2: http://www.bridgeguys.com/MGlossary/MexicanTwoDiamonds.html.

Any ACBL club director (including myself) can verify.
March 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
http://web2.acbl.org/documentLibrary/play/Convention-Chart.pdf

Strong is loosely defined as 15+ HCPs.
March 18, 2018
Kyle Rockoff edited this comment March 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Update:

We're still looking! Now potentially looking for teammates for a 1-2 day KO Mon-Weds as well. We're driving down to the tournament, and may just arrive for only the evening session Monday, so if you're interested in the 10K KO please PM us no later than afternoon-ish/early evening Sunday.
March 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm thinking big ideas that have a focus on young people are:

-Promote online bridge, not only for the sake of “young people like things online” but really try to reach the level of quality popular in similar online video gaming communities (e.g. League of Legends, Steam communities, etc)

-Money Bridge, more prize money in general–(I understand the desire to protect the intellectual integrity bridge, and the culture of the game. But this is standard in Chess, Bowling, online video game communities, and other competitive physical and mind sports.)

-Promote a afterschool K12 base, like many chess programs across country. I think is most important. As great as the focus is on College bridge this year, I believe the area to build a strong base community should probably be in middle and high schools. By college it's too late. Many people have already found the activities they enjoy. The earlier we can get people into bridge, the better. I think studying the difference in ACBL membership retention rate of people who started before college and after college is an important question to study, that may help bring insight on “where” the <30 focus should be.

-Innovate the rating system, create something on par with ELO for bridge. Masterpoints just aren't interesting to young players who have a lifetime of playing. Is a serious young player supposed to become a life master in 3-8 years and then stop? There is also the serious problem that many bridge-young players face, of feeling their skill level is not adequately assessed by their masterpoints. An ELO-similar system provides a more active means for younger players (as well as all other players) of measuring their personal growth, to push themselves, and to be recognized by others for their ability.

-Develop a task force in order to improve teaching methods for younger players. Teaching at the college level, I have found there is certainly a need to approach teaching younger players differently than the retiree crowd. The ACBL Bridge Series books are great at teaching rules, but not as great at teaching bridge thinking. While I think rules and cheat sheets and things of that nature are great for teaching retirees getting into bridge, I think younger people could benefit from a program that focus less on that and more on developing their bridge intuition. I think young people enjoy bridge more when they see bridge as less “a game of endless rules”, but more as a “game of endless puzzles”.

These are some of the things I'd like to be seeing more of. Sorry if this is off-topic (I think I may also post this in the Board of Governor and/or Youth Education form, where it probably belongs). I know you've been a great advocate of education topics like this on the Educational Foundation board in the past. Looking forward to continued progress by the ACBL!
March 1, 2018
Kyle Rockoff edited this comment March 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Jay,

1) As mentioned above, lots of great work is being done by the Education foundation this year to promote college bridge (thanks to Stephanie Threlkald and others working on the college program for all the work that's been done so far). What do you think are the three biggest things the ACBL could be working on, that currently isn't being worked on, to promote bridge to the <30 demographic?

2) As someone deeply involved with bridge on the college level, I can say there is always continuous frustration on how to reach out to my peers. Some complain learning the basics is too complicated. Others complain they don't have the time to go and play regular live bridge. But the biggest problem is the majority of people <30 don't even have an idea what bridge is! What aspects of bridge are the best pitch to the college-aged student?

(Live clubs and tournaments? Online play like on BBO? Declarer play puzzles? Learning Bidding? System development? Learning Defense?)


I just want to point out how important it is to promote the continued recruitment of young people. This recent December I had the great experience of playing at the JUSBCs (thanks also to the way-to-long-list-of-amazing-people who help put together that event). But one big issue was that the tournament's attendance was <90 people (that's less than one pair of young-players per state). The past two youth NABCs haven't had more than 250. For this weekend's College online bridge qualifier, there aren't more than 20 teams, 80ish players, registered (And it's only that high because a few colleges with good programs have done great work in getting more than one team to sign up).

Where are all the young players?

Bridge is a great game, and I don't want to discount power of Baby Boomers in also promoting the game (as you replied to Dave Caprera), but I also don't want to be the only player left in 40 years when I retire. Let's keep the game going!
March 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
fixed
Feb. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Did West hesitate before playing the Ace at trick 1 (even if it wasn't a long hesitation), or just once before trick 2? If west hesitated twice (once to decide what diamond to play at trick one, once to decide what to switch two at trick 2), I think it might be reasonable to rule East's partner had UI (though I'm certainly not enough of an expert to rule either way). If east played the Ace of diamonds quickly at trick one, I think it's hard to say UI was given, as East could clearly be just thinking about a plan for the whole hand. If west hesitated twice, west already has some UI from the first hesitation that east potentially already had a choice at trick 1 for what card to play, therefore might infer from the long hesitation at trick 2 that East potentially had a suit switch for trick 2, but thought against it upon seeing the continuation.
Feb. 26, 2018
Kyle Rockoff edited this comment Feb. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Currently reading Woosley's Matchpoints and finding it amazing! I also like Mel Colchimiro's book, How you can play like an Expert, rather a lot– he has a lot of “rules” but it's really more about how to think about hand evaluation during bidding. Watson is a must read (if rather dry). The few Lawrence stuff I've read (Reading opps cards, Card combinations) I also enjoy. Still need to finish Clyde Love's Bridge Squeeze Complete, but I think I like it just as much as Matchpoints and Colchimiro's book so far.

But, as I said in a comment above, the book that introduced me to bridge, Louis Sachar's “The Card Turner”, probably belongs at the top of the list!
Feb. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Cardturner is how I found bridge. If we're considering that a bridge book, I don't think I can rate anything else higher!
Feb. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good catch, can't edit the problem anymore (After 3, should be abstain 7). I think the consensus is opening 2 is a distortion, and the hand is worth a slam try, so guess it's not that big a deal.
Feb. 16, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top