Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nikos Delimpaltadakis
1 2 3 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To lighten up the mood, this discussion brought me in mind a partner of mine decades ago.
When an opponent did a theatrical hesitation in order to mislead him, he told him calmly:
“You know, I'm not the type of guy that calls the director. Next time you will do this, I will punch you.”
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The new initiative is quite welcomed. However, I would like to take a moment to appreciate and acknowledge what have been accomplished so far.

Boye says that is not a very impressive feat. In terms of number convictions he is probably right, but in terms of what we live at the table or as spectators, the picture have big positive changes.

Titles are not anymore shared among the usual suspects. Yes the good teams are often there, but not only them and not always the same. We have started again to see pairs to not be always right. Even if some were not convicted or even accused, I have a feeling that they applied some kind of “self-censorship”.
Or maybe they don't feel the need to do something wrong anymore, in order to compete with well known cheaters.

I have always the fear that this better environment, that have been created, may not last long. Everyone may start feeling relaxed and old habits may return for a few. I hope not, but we have to keep our eyes open.

To conclude is ok to discuss the next step, but please let's never end the discussion on how we will secure our current, hard earned step.
Aug. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Card playing clubs where always thriving during periods of crisis. I know from older people that during WWII and the German occupation the poker clubs where doing really great.
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The club managers will be very keen to find you partners, don't worry!
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Greece 95% of tournaments start at 20:30, more or less.
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
0-25 5%
26-40 10%
41-60 42%
61+ 43%
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's great. My only experience with a big metropolis is New York which do not reach the numbers you are mentioning for London. But maybe I am wrong again. Let me ask you something else. All the duplicate games you are mentioning, are official EBU ones? Giving masterpoints, the results being published on line in EBU database etc? Or some of them are more casual games?
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that the metro area counts in this case so Sheffield numbers are quite high with less than half the metro population.
June 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the clarification Lawrence. Under this light, I think even 5 are not permissible anymore, because the hesitation suggests partner is not short on spades and this eliminates the possibility 5 to be a phantom save.

On the other hand with short spades partner maybe was hesitating to double 4. Oh well…
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4
P
4
P

I do not understand the distinction between the pair of questions.
I suppose I shouldn't change my opinion depending on my partner's break of tempo. I should bid whatever I was planning to bid without the break of tempo.

I am genuinely puzzled by this and I am not saying to provoke a reaction. For example I see Kit saying “Without hesitation I might bid 4. WITH hesitation I will bid 5. So we have a player, with the best of intentions, that changes his planned bid based on partner's hesitation. Isn't this ”use“ of UI? Even if it's purpose is self-harm in order to ”burn" partner's hesitation?

In other words, if we are going to be the judge of partner's UI aren't we actually DOING exactly the thing we shouldn't do? Base our bid ON the hesitation? Even if the purpose changes now and is not to find the best contract, but to find the best contract not punishable because of UI.

I think the correct thing to do is to bid what you would bid anyway, call the director yourself and be ready to face the consequences if the decision won't be favourable. In our days I think that this is resolved not by the director him/herself but after a poll he/she conducts among players at your level.

With that said, as a footnote, I think that in competitive bids on 4 level and higher there should be an obligatory pause, similar with the ones after a skip bid.
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Giorgio Duboin was asked in an interview if there was a convention that he could strongly suggest. His suggestion was this:

After an overcall of a major in 1-level, the “cue-bid” is always 2, no matter what was the opening bid. The 2 bid shows 10+ with fit or 13+ without fit.
The 1M over-caller responses:
2M = Shows a very minimum overcall. Discourages any hopes for game or competition.
2 = Shows a minimum but decent overcall, with opening or close to opening values. It doesn't make a commitment towards game.
Any other bid is natural and forcing to game.

Since the advancer is losing the natural 2 bid, the bid that shows clubs is the bid of the opener's suit. You can play this as “weak or GF” keeping a jump to 3 as natural invitational. Alternatively you can play it as “invitational +”. (These are suggestions by me, not from Duboin, he was suggesting just that bid of opener's suit shows clubs.)

The advantage of this convention is that the over-caller has always available two bids to distinguish between a really bad overcall (2M) and a minimum but decent overcall (2). This is a exactly the theme of this post, where the advancer want's to stop under game only opposite a very bad overcall.
April 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bravo!
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I cant see how 5 is not better than 5. I agree it's not the perfect slam try but at least it MAY land you to a very good slam with spade control while 5 can never achieve this.
Dec. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Strange that no vote for “double” found so far. I wouldn't do it, but I'm tempted.
Dec. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is the “nearly never case”. Especially when he shouted “ACE” , this definitely meant he was not sleeping, he was aware that the Q appeared and he had every intention to cover it. Saying the Jack after the Ace was exactly this, a slip of the tongue during the correction.
Feb. 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Capitalising the title wasn't the wisest choice today!
Nov. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for your answers.
Since the hand occurred in the recent games, we had the chance to ask some world class experts. Here are their answers:
Duboin: 2
Quantin: I have more, but can't say anything else than 2.
Versace: I personally have convention for this position, with 2NT asking, pd replies 3 with a minimum T/O double and I bid 3 showing invitation with 4 card suit. Without the convention available, I bid 2.
Bessis: 3
Volker: 3
Sept. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is no explicit discussion but 1S tends to show 5 cards, so i guess Axx spades would have bid spades at some point.
Sept. 12, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I heard that USA team didn't have time to recover from jet lag, after missing 1-2 flights due to weather and security measures in Warsaw airport.
Sept. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's a pity to initiate discussion in such a serious issue with a “yes” or “no” answer, moreover when even the poll question is kind of misleading:

“Should the WBF continue to try getting bridge accepted as an Olympic sport?”

Bridge is already accepted as an Olympic sport, is just not one of the olympic sports included in the program of the olympic games.

I wonder if 85% of the people who vote “No” think we should rollback such a development which has the following benefits:

1) Funding from some governments or National olympic committees. Tax exemptions in many countries.

2) Easier access to schools and universities. Don't forget that in many countries Bridge is not so well known and local federations have to fight hard against prejudice towards a game played with cards. Being an olympic sport is an undisputed passport to enter schools. I really wonder why people want to voluntarily renounce this privilege.

3) Marking bridge as “olympic sport” is placing bridge, without any doubts, on the top of the games pyramid together with chess.
When you are trying to promote bridge against other games this is a huge weapon.
It proves with one word that bridge is so deep and sophisticated game that can be even considered a sport.
I can understand those who say “ah come on, sports should be physical”. I may even agree with them, but I don;t care, because the point is not to choose what is right in the dictionary but what benefits our game.

4) Even the somewhat irrelevant articles regarding doping, that at the moment sound funny for bridge, can give us a big advantage if we manage to widen their meaning and include cheating as a similar offence. It will open the way to standardized scientific methods to fight cheating without the need to “break codes” but with statistical tests. Anyway this is a long discussion and out of the scope of this reply.

Since the above benefits are so obvious, I think that the 85% of voters were voting against spending huge amounts of money trying to put bridge in the program of summer or winter Olympics. If indeed WBF spend so much for this cause I really can think better uses of the money. If not though, I think we should keep giving this hopeless fight because we dont lose anything and we gain an extra bit of positive publicity.
Aug. 22, 2016
Nikos Delimpaltadakis edited this comment Aug. 22, 2016
1 2 3 4
.

Bottom Home Top