Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Rosenberg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jan, if you have thought about this idea, and are against it, then I am also against it. I don't think it's worth making things logistically more difficult. I merely saw it as a small ‘disconnect’.

“And VERY easy if you have a SF bye?”

Good one.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“An assumption from the lead is that LHO holds the 10 and 9 of spades, RHO the ace and jack. ”

Not a valid assumption against a slam in an expert field. 10 leader could easily have the J. And I've more than once seen the lead of the 10 from 10xx vs. 6N.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John L: That's what I normally would have thought - until Andy said “their possible right to reopen the auction.” But he was probably just talking generally, and your reading is correct.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, maybe points should be given for 3rd-4th in the Open USBC.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is it really ok to stop partner bidding (say) 4N with 19 HCP? Or otherwise trying for slam because he thinks you have 12-14?
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is a valid concern. But we need/want to encourage caring about where you finish in the RR. Without that, it opens up all sorts of ‘bad’ possibilities.

Anyway, the ‘no real chance to win’ argument is also true in the VSR. So how somebody did there might be a function of having played one of those teams.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm missing why that's a fatal flaw. The players that didn't qualify still deserve some ‘points’?
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not certain that cutting from 9 to 8 makes less ‘sense’ than cutting from 5 to 4. Also with 8, is there a case for straight KO? RR's always have issues. Similarly, with 7 teams there could be standards for a bye with straight KO?

Having said all that, I still voted for the first option.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, that is my point. I don't see the logic of including VSR points - which are Open events, not Seniors - yet not including the Open USBC's - which I see as a ‘truer’ indicator.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ducking one club makes no sense. It carries a potential loss and no potential gain. It's either duck zero or duck twice. Against the majority of opponents, ducking twice will achieve its interim goal. Against truly expert opponents, you should win the first club.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think seeding should be based on VSR and RR and Senior USBC AND OPEN USBC (same year and previous year). But since I haven't seen the last one mentioned, I'm probably alone in that opinion.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that's exactly what Debbie thought when she wrote her post.
And I agree with you about how double-dummy analysis should be used.

Btw, your failure to put quotes arounde the word ‘advised’ is making me hope/worry about an alien incursion/invasion.
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David B: “It does seem a bit harsh to be savaging Phillip for his choice of opening lead without acknowledging his perception of an elegant line of play.”

I agree. Which is why my first comment on this sub-thread ended:

“But, yes, nice idea about ruffing a at trick two. A recurring theme on ‘good’ hands.”
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True (as long as East can win the first diamond) - and now no one can. I guess you can say that, this time, it did not cost not to lead the high card from AK.
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The more I think about it, the less sense the spade lead on the actual hand makes tome. It makes some sense to lead from J10x (or, for that matter xxx) - to knock out their AK befeore they knock out yours.
But a singleton, in addition to ‘pickling’ partner's holding there, might have the effect of inducing declarer to ‘panic’ and rise with ace - and perhaps succeed in a hand he would ‘never’ make. Indeed, that's more or less what happens on the actual hand.
Obviously, it's possible to construct hands where the singleton works out best. But I'm finding it a lot easier to construct hands where the high club is necessary. I would say ‘simplest’ is 4 rounds of clubs, promoting a trump trick.
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“My experience has been that, since this is often a suit declarer needs to attack himself, the lead helps him more often than not.”

My experience has been, when I (or my partner or my teammate or my opponent) don't lead from AK then, for various reasons, something bad happens.
There are some rarer cases (usually below the 3-level) where it's pretty clear not to lead it - and then, strangely enough, it seems to work OK.

And I think you can now add this hand for that theory to YOUR experience. Had you led a high club, I believe declarer would just go down playing you for Hx in spades….

But, yes, nice idea about ruffing a at trick two. A recurring theme on ‘good’ hands.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The OP was silent on the agreement about spot card lead, and the author has not yet answered David Yates' question. I guess I had the feeling that if it WAS 3rd best, the author would have said so.

Maybe it's just as Kit says, and West has something like 7, xx, KJ109876, AKx (and you can endplay him). But the spade lead on that feels really weird to me.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit W: “I don't see any chance if West has led from K107(x) or from a doubleton”

I do. West has K107, Jxx, KJ1098x, K (or 3-2-7-1). Win A at trick one, draw trump and play a club. West wins and doesn't find the play of a low spade. That seems at least as likely to me as the combination you want - West not leading from the AK AND ducking the AK (or East being asleep).

Not that I think that this is Phillip's idea - which I've yet to figure out. If I played this hand at the table, my first thought would probably be ‘there’s no legitimate make here'.
Oct. 9
Michael Rosenberg edited this comment Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
…or, when forgotten to jackasses?
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
"3 sets hearts for slam..

Not chez moi. For me 3 is still probing for the best game. It suggests xx - 3-card or good doubleton would bid 3N. Singleton would go past 3N.

The only way I can set hearts is to bid four DIAMONDS over 3.
Oct. 8
.

Bottom Home Top