Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Ma
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But is unbid M forcing?
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, ambiguous above should be Unambiguous.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, how does that solve the problem of the OP? If the top bracket is open to all, then the talent level will be diffused. A nobody like me would enter just to have the chance to play top players. Out of 7 or 8 rounds, how many top teams would Dave have to play to make it satisfactory to him?
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your bias is obvious. The OP asked if it is appropriate to shrink down international Bridge tournaments. He is not asking if Olympics, Super Bowl etc should be shrunk down.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It may be better for those that can barely take finesse if you use your criteria. But it is not better for the likes of OP who want to play against top players.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are full of it. It has always been if a topic is Bridge related.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The entire thing is paradoxical. Dave wants to be in the top bracket because it is exclusive, but because it is exclusive, his team did not make the grade.

Those who claim that everyone who wants to should be allowed in the top bracket should read David Vaughn's comment above.

Note that I am not commenting in whether Dave's team was bumped properly in according to the CoC. However, I am sure if Grossack Bros were bumped, there would be much outcry here if that was publicized.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can't get partner to double for penalty in a suit that she has and you don't. At least not as easy.
Feb. 11
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, did you see that they are playing negative FB?
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, I get side-tracked. The point is this suit is good for defense or offense whether you think the best strategy is to lead it on defense or not.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Phil, of course it is a matter of chance and probability or as Clint Eastwood said. do you fell lucky. I just feel good if I lead a suit that i have good probability of getting 5 tricks back even if I give one up.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You would be right if Grossack Bros don't feel compelled air out their grievance here, which may be true.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not worrying about overtricks when they have 21 and we have 19 (giving partner 11). The only case against leading is if partner has singleton.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have you read comments here on BW not just on this thread, but on many others.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And if they had let in Dave's team and relegated the Grossacks? There would have been a riot.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So they are guarantee a spot in the top bracket, with 24 teams, 16 of which are at or below the level Dave was complaining about. How does that help?
Feb. 10
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, if you have KJxxxx and outside A and QJ, second seat, you would not open 2, you would open 1 if you open at all. Whether you consider AKxxxx a weak suit or not for second seat is up to you.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
First come first serve as tie breaker is the way to go.

1) Teams with GLM have priority. If two teams have GLM and only one can get in. first comer is tie breaker if > one minute difference (or some unambiguous time interval). If still tie, use MP total/person.

2) If teams without GLM are involved. Total MP/person is tie breaker. Beyond that, first come first serve. If still tie, use affirmative action or whatever. Life is too short to worry when it gets to point.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The point is known M and unknown m is not the same as known m and unknown M.
Feb. 10
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously the less your suit, the more you need compensation value. However, the slant should be on our hands and less defensive values. No matter what, you should not have weak suit.
Feb. 10
.

Bottom Home Top