Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Bell
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 25 26 27 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unless BBO has greatly improved their movements since the last time I played an online indy - admittedly many years ago - you'll have a devil of a time making sure everyone partners everyone else.
March 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks all. My opinion is in line with the (vast) majority here.
March 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Tom. One single-elimination per month sounds good.

The double-elimination will take much longer. I suggest you want to be down to the last 8 or so teams before starting another one.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is there a way to add rosters?
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, amazing how much this has dated in the past month or so.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Brian, please assume that there was no discussion between the teams regarding the need to inform the club. Thanks.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bill -

Yes, 1 (or 1) showing 4+cards is pretty bad, but “everyone” plays it so we just accept the shortcomings, whereas the losses are much more obvious when the rest of the field is distinguishing four-card suits from five.

However, the flaws of the uncontested auction are exposed less often - the worst scenario is that 4th seat bids 4, and this is much more likely to happen if 2nd seat bid 1 than if they passed.
March 18
Mike Bell edited this comment March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In that case, it can only be a suggestion that Phoenix had God on their side.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree with this, Geoff - indeed I play that even 1m-P-1 shows five.

Bilal - if my 1 was natural I'd play X = four spades, 1 = five, but I think opposite a nat/BAL 1 you need a way to act on a balanced hand without four spades.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Andy. My concern re:1NT = clubs is the wrong-siding of no-trumps - that's true of any potential meaning for 1NT but showing “a minor” feels particularly bad in this respect.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe he had reason to be particularly cautious regarding corona.
March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course.

My assertion is that it's unnecessary to bid a natural 1NT just because you *do* have a heart stopper when you could instead bid 1 as a transfer to 1NT.
March 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With scoring errors addressed and an appeal heard, Phoenix won by 2 IMPs.
March 17
Mike Bell edited this comment March 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From the White Book -

“Suppose owing to incorrect seating or placement of boards on the table, some but not all the boards are played correctly, some not. Averages will be given on the boards not played. The match is still scored using the same VP scale as if all the boards had been played correctly.”

So it seems the regulation was followed correctly, although it seems odd that it should apply when only one comparison was possible - a minimum threshold of “half the boards” seems reasonable to me.

“If the TD is responsible for the incorrect seating of the teams, then the teams score the converse of the above (this award is not over-generous and assumes the teams concerned to be partially at fault for the error); e.g. 12 VPs out of 20 instead of 8”.

Stating that an award is not over-generous doesn't make it true. IMO it should be 8-8 unless the players were totally blameless.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Malinowski vs Phoenix, both tables sat the same way while on vugraph (only one of the tables had an operator). The operator/vugraph audience realised this after eleven of the twelve boards had been played; the twelfth board was scored correctly and Malinowski gained a swing.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
During the following set, all teams were asked to fill in their line-up slips for the current set and the previous one; there was much laughter as two teams asked for guidance in this matter.
March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that the error was realised in time for one board to be compared; and that the match was scored based on that one result.

No penalties or other adjustments were issued.

Edited to remove some stuff about the regulations that was slightly misrepresentative - the correct information is in my post below.
March 16
Mike Bell edited this comment March 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are the practical implications of this approach, David?

“If it hesitates, shoot it, unless the player claims they were trying to be ethical”?!
March 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit, your approach has no basis in law. What a hesitation suggests cannot be deduced from one hand.

Further, the logical extension of your argument is that, if partner hesitates and then bids 3 on your example hand, and we correctly guess to pass, the result should be adjusted to 3NT going off. It seems to me that the lawmakers were trying to avoid this “if it hesitates, shoot it” approach when they inserted the word “demonstrably” into Law 16.
March 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner puts down a hand barely worth a 3 bid and 3NT would have been going off. What now?
March 11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 25 26 27 28
.

Bottom Home Top