Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nick Warren
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fast arrival could apply, but this hand isn't it IMO. 12hcp, 2 bullets and a singleton is a lot more slam suitable than many hands I might have opened.
July 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't answer without knowing the jurisdiction. In the UK it is routine for 1-2-2 to show 5. If it shows a min or is a waiting bid that does not guarantee 5, then I would expect it to be alerted here. Can't speak for what is normal elsewhere.
July 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wish I picked up a big one more often to have body language for it ;)

Seriously, I know what you mean. I also know it is hard as a director to know who to believe, especially when the laws don't describe different body languages.
July 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can only say that I am one of the first to complain about the UI rules especially with respect to what hesitations are supposed to suggest and even more especially so when the players concerned were inexperienced. That said, my gut reaction in this particular case was to roll back because it seems a fairly blatant, indeed even flagrant case of taking advantage of UI.

Thinking more rationally, I'd want to know just exactly how inexperienced they really were. I am highly dubious that an experienced player would open 3C with that hand, for example. I'd want to know the vulnerability. What sort of range of hands responder would bid 5C on and so on.
July 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. At the risk of inflaming some of the fairer sex, who would change the light bulbs? That isn't, really, a tongue in cheek comment. My wife actively wants me to do those sort of chores. She wants me to “wear the trousers” and make the financial decisions. To some women, she is being sexist - or letting the side down or being a victim of the culture in which she was raised or however you want to put it. For others she is just being practical. Fact is life is like that whatever the reason. Which is what annoys me about this whole equality debate - women themselves have to quit the mixed messages. That or face the fact that all things are not as equal as some percentage of their number suppose it ought to be. I don't, honestly, know what the answer is.
June 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Women like to complain about men staring at their boobs. What they will only reluctantly admit to is they eye up men's bottoms. Unless quite drunk they never admit to staring at a man's - well - you know where I mean. But they do! Eye tracking proves it.

Does that make either men or women sexist? Personally I don't think so. It might make some seen as having bad manners. But mainly it is biology.
June 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't tend to say to others to smile more, or cheer up. If I do, it is genuinely meant as a friendly gesture and might be made to someone of the same or opposite gender and within or outwith my age group.

People tell me to cheer up rather more often that I tell other people to do so (maybe I'm a but too serious?). Anyway, I have not noticed there being a gender or age bias between those who've said it. I haven't taken it as in anyway offensive. I don't know what the fuss is about in relation to this comment with respect to sexism.

I'm wondering if it is a U.S. thing????
June 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me the question is not whether South should bid 5, but it is more whether it should be done before the X rather than after it. Anyway, whatever the rights and wrongs of that, this is all rather tough for a beginner to work out in the heat of battle.
June 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not saying the brain and human psyche are the same. I personally don't confuse them. I've noticed that others tend to either confuse them or actively think they are the same thing. I hoped not to draw criticism from such persons - and got pulled up by someone in the other camp. C'est la vie!

All I am saying is equal rights is one thing. You can make/withdraw women only events thinking you're doing the right thing by women. You can even indulge in active pro female discrimination (not that all women want it and some even think that itself is derogatory). None of it matters much of a hoot if women don't take the opportunities they do get (and they do refuse opportunity in rather large numbers). Whether that is brain, culture, lack of role models or whatever, frankly I don't care. Anyone man/woman, straight/gay, black/white young/old or whatever dichotomy has gotta take life by the balls. And moaning about hand bag videos has something to do with that - but not very much.
June 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I have posted before on this board, I have 6 children. 5 sons and 1 daughter. Two of my sons have not shown any significant interest in learning bridge, the other 4 I have taught. The best player of the 4 is my daughter.

However, there is something about the female brain, psyche or whatever you call it that leads many of them (not all) to shy away from “serious” competition. Witness, for example, last year I was part of a team that happened to be all men. This year two have had to drop out for personal reasons and in casting around to find replacements, I've asked 3 other players who just happen to be all women. One declined again for personal reasons, the other two seemed shy of the competition.

Or, going back to the subject of my daughter. Most clubs around where I live and similar to clubs anywhere and everywhere. There is one, however, that, for one session a week, sometimes attracts premier league players, strong county players and stronger than average club players. I like to go there to learn. I've invited my daughter, but met with feelings of “I don't want to embarrass myself” and such like. I haven't tended to invite my sons because I don't think they're up to it and would randomise the field too much. But they - they'd be up for it. Now, I am not saying all women are poor at bridge (far from it) or all are afraid of competition (because that is clearly untrue). However, while a large percentage refuse (and it is refuse in a lot of cases) to compete with men, the top competition is going to remain dominated by men. I can understand women whining on about “talk to the face, not my boobs” and so on and so forth, but the fact remains that as a subset of the human race, equal rights is one thing, grabbing the opportunity is quite another.
June 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I once opened 1NT and someone passed with a solid suit. I got a bottom. Then I got the opportunity to do it to someone else. I got another bottom.
June 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What, you mean harmonisation of master point systems such that they are transferable?! Steady on.

Like other posters here I am a bit of a cynic. But, I'll give the organisers benefit of the doubt - they have to start somewhere.
June 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some hands, like a normal looking 1NT, and you see a ludicrous line for 9 tricks that risks the contract and you see a safer line for 7 or 8 tricks. Since it is a normal contract and even at matchpoints you think the 9 trick line is too off beat. So you take your 7 or 8 tricks and congratulate yourself on a job well done. Then you see the results at the other tables. Vulnerable opps have got too busy and conceded -200, some idiots in a way optimistic 3NT making on the lucky lie of the cards and so on and you realise you've got a flat bottom for your troubles.

I get enough of the above along with rather too many outright mistakes to have all that much sympathy with internationals. But, yes, we all get bad days at the office and indeed bad spells where nothing much seems to go right over quite a number of sessions.
June 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AB: “In a team of six playing equal shares, the new schedule means playing only 48 boards a day”

Actually it is a maximum of 48. Some days there are 3 sessions instead of 4, making it 32 boards. One day your team gets a bye. And, playing a strict rotation of pairs, some days you're off in the 1st session meaning you're off in the 4th too. It is just 40 boards per day average.

Not that I'm arguing for more - it isn't a stamina test. But the previous schedule was a waste of the players' time.
June 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am an ordinary EBU member and I support the efforts of the EBU to finance the international teams. We are not all moaners about what is spent on such efforts.
June 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Does it cost anything to duck? Surely not…”

Well, probably not. It is just possible partner has lead from KQ86 and declarer has taken a flier with Txx. Unlikely, I must admit.
June 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I appreciate the cost aspect. But it doesn't mitigate the fact that the team that wins will probably do so by smashing lesser teams. And if that doesn't happen, it almost certainly will apply to the 2nd or 3rd places.

If cost and fixed length of the event is of sufficient concern to affect matters (as it has), it would be possible, for example, to divide Europe (a large area) into 4 geographic zones and have a RR in each zone. The top 2 or 3 qualify for the finals later in the year that will not involve the weaker teams.

(Or at least the above works in theory - perhaps 4 qualifiers and a final of reduced numbers would be just as expensive in the long run).

It would also be possible to have a premier league of European nations (say the top 16) who compete in the final and the bottom two get relegated to the 2nd division who can have their fixed length RR.

My point is that it is not necessary to have some top class bridge teams who have legitimate aspirations to the world title determine who is the best by who can beat up the Faroe Islands (no disrespect intended) the most.
June 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I suspect that the all-play-all format will mean that it will be decided by how well they beat the lesser teams rather than the head-to-head matches”

Unfortunately.

By all means have some sort of RR to eliminate the weaker teams down to the last 8 or whatever, but a win by beating up the fish lessens the value of it IMO.
June 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not sure that the votes prove very much. A lot of people vote more on where they come from than on any rational assessment (me included! - just admitting to my tribalism)
June 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Played by East? Opps silent? What lead?
June 14, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top