Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Fleisher
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think it is wrong to think about and / or ask such questions. Just the thousands of posts on the other threads indicate that many people are very interested in the phenomena of cheating. This is just another, academically interesting, aspect of it.

What would be wrong is a following act of incorporating the answers into real use.
Aug. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Looks like declarer is trying to induce a switch. May have something like KQXXXXX A XXXX X where pitches are necessary but entries are an issue.
Aug. 21, 2015
Michael Fleisher edited this comment Aug. 21, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In high level of play it is not unlikely that a team captain looks at records of play and determines the best strategy in an upcoming match, based on the other team's weaknesses or styles revealed.
Your beginner opponents, probably without being fully aware, did the same. They found a way to “fix” you.
I think this is definitely not cheating. It is a bridge strategy based on knowing you.
Aug. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Transparency for all is my vote.

A process to seal records should be available and used when appropriate.
Aug. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jack,
I think all are frustrated about the fact that there apparently is a whole lot of cheating going on. Just look around this site for threads.
Mike was definitely a victim of this frustration. However, I don't think “self righteous” is appropriate for describing the people on the other thread who let their frustration be aimed at Mike.
Don't forget that the blurb in the bulletin presented results of an official procedure which found him guilty of some offenses. These offenses are very easy to interpret as cheating. In fact, the simplest explanation with NO OTHER DATA seems very condemning.

I think we should work on getting all facts in the open from both sides. In other words, get the ACBL to adopt transparency policy.
Aug. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Last I heard about recorder forms was in the context of proving there exist black holes.
Aug. 18, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder what happens if West denies having the K. Is it allowed to mislead as a response to an attempt to mislead?
April 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Surely no for regionals and sectionals. A yes for club games. That makes for a “no” vote.
April 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes.
Sorry for slow response.
March 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. 2 was alerted and explained as stated above..
2. Not disclosed during the bidding because we didn't ask. Presumably preemptive or very strong (min-max).
3. J54 54 AQJT7 Q73
4. Not that I remember. The person makes these kind of mistakes a lot. Doesn't affect tempo.
March 2, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
s has 19 hcp. This is about 6 more points that were revealed by south's bidding. The odds of having all key cards are overwhelming given north drove to slam early in the auction. The solid spade suit as well as the great quacks are all that is needed. no Ui
Dec. 24, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the BIT, if at all, suggests passing.
Nov. 12, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for your response. I edited my entry above.
Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, this means that a little more than 60% of the time partner will hold 5 or more when holding at least 4 . Also, when not holding at least 4 a black suit is very welcome. So, altogether, we have 60% to survive a 4 bid and a much greater percentage to survive a black suit bid. So, IMO, doubling is very much a favorite.
Put differently - I interpret your simulation as telling that in 60% or more of the cases, a game is likely in our direction. I would take these chances every time, as opposed to letting them play in 4.
Nov. 3, 2014
Michael Fleisher edited this comment Nov. 3, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see any reason for being punished by a break in tempo. 4 requires a mandatory hesitation anyway. Nothing wrong with a slow action.
Oct. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Main issue - What to do if partner bids 4 after your double? I would sit for that and hope for the best.
This raises an interesting problem. Is partner likely to hold 5+ in if she bids them? Without calculating exactly, I think that the odds highly favor 5+ since between you and E you can count 10 - 12 cards in .
Another reason to double is the location of your points. It looks like a 30 point deck if not playing in .
I therefore double and accept any strain partner suggests.
Oct. 29, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.

Note that this play is a result of analyzing that you “can't” have 6 spades.
Knowing that the robot believes your bidding, you also know that not covering with the J falls within the parameters of the robot.
This is an exploitable edge for us humans, at least until the next version for robots software rolls out :)
Oct. 8, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not forcing.
Sept. 30, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted pass.
RHO doubled, which means that if pard has some values outside of H they are not necessarily well placed. The danger of getting doubled in 3H and paying 200 or more is looming.
Holding a stiff in one of the unbid suits would certainly make me bid 3H. As it is, pard's likely shortage is clubs and we may have too many losers.
Sept. 23, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top