Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Monty Page
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 46 47 48 49
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We've had this discussion before, and I'm with you Bud. I have also NEVER seen an arrow switch at a tournament. Around here, sectionals always play one session pair games (except for the Sunday Swiss), and always declare overall rankings.

On the plus side, the tournament directors, after years of “we've never needed WEB movements before”, have finally started playing a few of them. This transition, based on the current rate of change, should take another 15 years or so to complete. After that, we can start agitating for arrow switches, with final implementation scheduled for about 2060. Of course, this will be about 25 years after the final death throes of bridge in the US …
Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had never heard this expression either, so I also looked it up. Around here, we say that the person in question needs some butt spackel (that is, he needs to fill in the crack).
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have always played that double was weak, and pass was game forcing with no suit to show. I always thought it didn't matter much either way, but about a year ago (maybe two) I had a hand on which it would have been better to play pass as weak, and double as game forcing (Ace, or King, or two Queens). Opener had a balanced minimum (22 points), and responder had a terrible hand with six clubs.

The auction went like this :

2C - (2S) - X - (P) - ?

I was opener and had to guess whether to leave the double in or bid something. The problem was that although I knew partner was weak, I did not know whether he was balanced. I guessed to pass, and wouldn't you know, we could not beat 2S, but we could have made 3C.

Although this has happened only once to me in many years, I now believe that pass weak, and double at least game going is better. On this particular hand it would then have gone like this :

2C - (2S) - P - (P) - X - (P) - ?

Opener can double to show a balanced hand (the weakest hand he can have), and responder can bid or pass, depending on whether he wants to declare or defend.

Maybe there is a corresponding hand for which double = weak is better, I don't know. I do know that if it only matters once every ten years or so, it's not the top thing on my bidding problems list.
Sept. 14
Monty Page edited this comment Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The most likely need is when you've set up a WEB, and an extra pair shows up late.
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At our club, some object to one winner movements, I have no idea why. However, except for the 4 table Howell, no one winner movement is perfectly balanced, although arrow switching 1/8 of the boards always gives good balance.

As to “How do you know who won”, in a 2 winner movement, there are 2 winners. Of course, ACBLScore assigns overall rankings for 2 winner movements of more than 15 tables, and for all special games, even though it makes no sense at all. ACBL making no sense - now there's a surprise.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are other choices also. Mitchells are fine for 3, 5, 7, 9, and 13 tables. Double Weave Mitchells are perfect movements for 4, 8, and 12 tables. Clay movements are perfect movements for 4 or 6 tables. These are all play all two winner movements. The The Double Weave Mitchells and the Clays are 24 board movements, so we don't use them if there is a half table.

Hesitation Mitchells work well for 7 1/2, 8, 11, 11 1/2, or 12 tables, and Double Hesitation Mitchells work well for 10 tables. These are one winner movements, not perfect, but still pretty good.

Rover Mitchells also work well if there is an extra half table beyond a standard Mitchell.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My wife and I play a slightly modified version of this, it is an elegant solution that works very well.

Basically it allows opener to show a 4 card major at the two level before showing a longer, lower ranking suit at the 3 level.

The only downside is that one must give up whatever one was previously using a 2D opening to show.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my opinion, Multi should be allowed in any Open event, without restriction.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought of that, but at our club there were only three Souths good enough to think of that. I'll ask them what happened at their tables tomorrow.
Sept. 10
Monty Page edited this comment Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I picked up this hand, spades would not be my trump suit of choice.
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We've solved the problem of bump movements getting screwed up. We give the roving pair a piece of paper marked “N/S has the sit-out next round”. Before sitting down to play each round, the roving pair gives it to the North player who will be bumped on the the following round. This seems to take care of it.
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am in total agreement.
Sept. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play this way :

1N - 2S is one of :
a. Balanced invite to 3NT. Opener bids 2N with a min, or 3C with a max.
b. Weak with clubs. Responder corrects 2N to 3C, or passes 3C.
c. Slam invite in clubs. Responder shows shortness next.

1N - 2NT is one of :
d. Weak with diamonds.
e. Weak with both minors.
f. Slam invite in diamonds.
g. Slam invite with both minors.
Opener bids 3C if he has more clubs than diamonds, else 3D. Now a weak responder either passes or corrects 3C to 3D. A slam inviting responder shows shortness next (3NT shows club shortness).

If the opponents double the 2S bid, pass shows a stopper (partner can redouble to play), XX shows a desire by opener to try 2SXX, responder can pass or keep bidding. Similar if the opponents double a Stayman or transfer bid.

If responder wants to make a slam try in a minor, but has no shortness, he has to go through Stayman, then rebid 3m.

I don't know if this is best, but it's been working pretty well for a while (in a weak NoTrump context).
Aug. 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, at least this explains why I didn't like any of my choices. I chose pass without much conviction that it was best …
Aug. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm in Florida. I know of one non-sanctioned game held regularly in our town. Card fees are one dollar in that game. Sanctioned games are six dollars.
Aug. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This entire scheme has no chance unless you have the entire auction for every deal.
Aug. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Brian,

It should show a positive response that does not have 4+ spades. Since you're wrong-siding any potential spade contract it should also deny any interest in spades. All in all, I think it's a response that should be avoided, much like a 2NT response to 2C should be avoided.
Aug. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Brian,

Are you asking about 2S over 2C, or 2S over 2D?
July 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ken Rexford wrote a book (can't remember the title right now) explaining how to use strong bids of both 2C and 2D to show a four card major at the 2 level before showing a longer, lower ranking suit next.

Basically, 2D and 2C openings are equally strong.

2D promises an unbalanced had with at least four spades. With 4 card support, responder can make either a weak raise of spades (3H transfer to 3S) or a strong raise of spades (2NT). Otherwise repsonder bids 2H waiting. After 2H waiting, opener rebids spades with 5 or more, or shows his second suit if he has only 4 spades.

After a 2C opening, and a 2D waiting response, opener does not need a natural 2S bid to show 5+ spades and an unbalanced hand because he would have opened 2D with that hand. Therefore opener's 2S rebid can be used to show an unbalanced hand with exactly 4 hearts and a longer lower ranking suit.

Given the basic idea, you can work out the details yourself.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
… or his third turn … or his fourth turn.
July 20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 46 47 48 49
.

Bottom Home Top