Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Marty Deneroff
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Technically, you must call the director. In my experience, what the director will do is have you leave the table so your parner can explain. The director should caustion your partnr that he may not take advantage of the knowledge that you don't know your agreement. That should be the end of it.
16 minutes ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North is 5-5 or 5-6 in the minors and is trying to decide whether to go for the risky but matchpoint-desirable 2NT or the safer minor suit contract.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In what practcal way is online different from screens? If there isn't any, as it appears to me, we have a set of rules that should apply.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I bid 2 per system and wait to see what partner has to say about her hand. Heading for 4 but may go slamming if partner now bids 3
Feb. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My understanding is the above is illegal convention in ACBL. You are allowed to open 1NT with a singleton, but are not allowed to have a convention to identify the fact that you have done so.
Feb. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you have the power to make whatever ruling you want, and nobody can overturn it, it is ‘legal’, as you make the law. The question is whether your club is actually playing bridge or a new game you invented. The second, and far more relevant, question is whether the people who play in the club are happy with your new game and will continue to come to you to play it.
Feb. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. Convention cards may or may not exist at all in a club game. You will be hard pressed to find a club director (or even a TD) who will truly enforce a requirement for a CC.
2. Saying this is meaningless. Players in any Open game can enter regardless of what they know or don't know. At a club you will find a large percentage of players who know only SA and / or 2/1GF. What the charts say is irrelevant. The players in question are also not aware these charts exist, and wouldn't care anyway.
Feb. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The x shows two places to play, likely with a good 4 or perhaps 5 spades (willing to play in a 7 card spade fit if he only has four; if he has 5 he doesn't like his spades much or he would have just bid 2) and at least 4 clubs, and denies 3 or more hearts. He should have at least 10ish points, as he is likely committing us to a contract at the three level.

All bids by opener below game are NF except for a cue bid of intervenor's suit (3). 2NT would show minimum with diamonds stopped, and 3C would show 4+ clubs and a minimum. (BTW this hand I consider sub-minimum and shouldn't have opened - doesn't have 2 QT).
If opener has enough to commit us to game opposite partner's minimum x, he bids 3 and waits to see what responder does. In this case, responder's first duty is probably to bid 3NT with diamonds stopped, and 3 if he has no stopper and does have 2 card support.
Dec. 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is always POSSIBLE. Ultimately, the hotel is looking at its bottom line. If you don't take food, you need to pay more for something else so they make the same profit. However, it is important to realize that the profit is less than the total price for the food, since servers and the food itself are included. If you don't want the food, a competent negotiator should be able to get that for a reasonable price. Same goes for other perks such as free rooms for BoD members, directors, etc.

In my experience, everyone ends up happier if you negotiate a simple deal for what you need (ballrooms + PA system + a favorable room rate for attendees) and buy everything else a la carte. That way you know where your costs really are.
Dec. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mark,
Happy to see you pushing this. I find it hard to imagine how any Director could oppose this, so I can't understand how it was quashed. If you can elaborate, I am sure people would be interested.
Dec. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is a relatively easy way to please (almost) everybody: Make the print version of the bulletin an option that costs an extra X$ (whatever the actual cost is) per year on top of membership. Those who are happy with the on-line version (or no Bulletin at all) can opt not to get it, and those who want it should be willing to pay for it. Obviously the reduced volume will hit the cost somewhat, but with modern digital printing techniques, things like this are much less sensitive to volume than they used to be.
Nov. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Regardless of how many MP a member has, they paid their dues and should have a vote. Why should the one with more MP have greater say?

Regardless of that, IMO the issues the BoD should be considering are likely pretty orthogonal tohow many MP the members have, and they should NOT be beholding to anyone who voted for them anyway. The BoD is about strategy and governance. It is not intended to be a body of representative like congress.
Nov. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Best suggestion I've heard yet! But I can't imagine this actually being instituted.

Alternatively, just hand out a substantial procedural penalty for each round played without two cards on the table.
If this is draconian, it is no more so than cell phone penalties.
Oct. 12, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Never said it is anything else. I am not an expert, and I don't think there is any standard for this, although it was taught to me by someone I consider an expert.
Aug. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 would be a 3 card limit raise (10 to bad 12 hcp) while 4 is weaker - a constructive raise that is enough for game opposite a reverse
Aug. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not a psyche unless done intentionally. That doesn't count.
July 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play that 3 of other major, 4, 4 are all splinters, and define these as having a maximum of three controls (A=2, K=1). Strongr hands bid Jacoby 2NT. We play that 3NT is a balanced 12-14 with exactly 2 card support for partner's major. Works for me. YMMV.
July 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In NYC, we haven't had 2 day knockouts at our Regionals in ~ 8 years. They died from lack of interest.

Every day there is a Bracketed RR Teams (with top bracket a Swiss open to all comers) an Open Pairs and a GR Pairs, plus most days a 1 session 299 pairs. I find it a bit monotonous, but I don't really see people complaining about the schedule. There is also the 2 day Goldman Pairs and the Reisinger Open Knockout once a year.

Not perfect, but it seems people have voted with their feet and wallets, and this is where we have landed.
June 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't get all this discussion that claims ‘The rules say there must be exactly 8 teams in each bracket’. This is obviously not true, as it will cause you to turn teams away 7/8 of the times because the brackets don't come out even. In fact, at every RR Teams even I have ever seen, the directors usually create one or two larger brackets to take the overflow. If one of them comes out to be 9 teams, they play 8 matches instead of 7, with one less board per match. If 10-13, they play it as a Swiss, since there really is no other reasonable approach. But usually they can create something that works out. Being rigid and saying you can't have an extra team in the top bracket is just stupid and unworkable.

However, what may have actually been going on here is that letting a team play up would have caused a problem because they started with a multiple of 8 teams in the event, and letting someone move created a 7 team bracket and a 9 team bracket. If I were the director, I wouldn't allow that either.
May 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Blaming the ACBL for this is incorrect. CoC for regionals are set by the District, not the ACBL. Just played in the NYC regional this past week. They have top bracket open to all and run as a Swiss if more than 8 teams. Same with the bottom bracket. All other brackets are 8 team round robbins.
May 29, 2018
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
.

Bottom Home Top