Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Norman Selway
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jim Fox, average would do it, but if you are typical, then manifestly not you.
Oct. 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dale, a “Normal” man is surely a man who objects to this type of commentary, fairly,“normal” I would have thought, but please correct me if you think that I am wrong.
Oct. 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Absoloutely accurate, no critism intended of you guys.
Oct. 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Many thanks Michael, that is clearer now. In the inverted sequence, I was the felon. It was a new piece of kit and I just did not remember. My fault. In the other sequence, the player concerned had been recently been playing a different method with a different partner in the latter stages of the World Mixed
Championships and was momentarily confused. The continuations over an intervening double were not mentioned at the table so I imagine that they would be the same as without. The question never came up, maybe I should have asked - or maybe the director should but the player wrote down his correct agreement at the table to the satisfaction of the director. As I mentioned, I have no argument with the ruling and did not appeal it but I just wanted to know why the situations were different.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wow, neither player had, a, “History” of foretting conventions, both were regarded as International class players, both are regarded as very ethical. I must admit that I find these questions quite surprising and far grom the point of my post. But if that floats your boat,,,.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok, I cannot be clearer, I did not realise that this was such an abstruse situation. I still dont so I shall live, at one, with my ignorance and the newly found appreciation of how simple things can be made so complicated if enough effort is made.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I may be a strange and wonderful person but I tend to ask questions to find out what the answer is. IF i knew the answer, I would not ask the question!
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok, I thought that I had made this clear, but lets try again, In both instances one player missbid, in both instances the partner gave the correct systemic explaination. In both instances a defender was misled by the explaination and did the wrong thing. Simple? In each instance the director gave a different ruling. I am only asking why? Don't complicate it.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry Michal? Do you mean misstyping Frances's name? I do not know the answer to my question and I certainly have not the faintest idea what you mean by your post. Please educate me.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, Frances, not great keyboarding.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Totally disagree with you Francis, all that you really need to know is on display.
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is what I would have thought!
Oct. 19, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I played a rubber against JDR many moons ago where he doubled a five level cue and his partner saved in that suit. John was of course void and the result when his partner saved in the suit is still one of my favourite memories in bridge. People nowadays want to make bridge a one dimensional game, it is not!
Oct. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Collings or Breskal would have a void diamond and want the lead!
Oct. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does anyone still play, 3NT, Diamonds and NT, X- 4 - X or Lower Minor over pre - empts? We did then!
Oct. 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe that Kenneth Konstam in the 40's and 50's favoured 5 card spades and 4 card hearts.
Oct. 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some players would think with the Queen, or at least they used to in the old days.
Sept. 18, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I cannot remember it clearly, (RF, help please), but in a controversial hand in an important match, declarer needed to know which opponent he had squeezed. On the run of something, LHO became more and more agonised so declarer played him to have been squeezed. LHO had XXXx, XXX, XXX, XXX, and knew the position early on. Was he entitled to protect his partner? It was a very top class game.
Sept. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hmm, I really do not like the poster's implications here. He assumes that the pause, in a very important situation was entirely to mislead the opposition. Is that what he would do himself in this situation or is he just impugning the player at the table? Is it totally sure that the player was not just double checking before making a decision? Did the player concerned file a suit for defamation of character? A distasteful post IMO and as a director particularly surprising.

Having got that off my chest, there was a celebrated incident in an important match in England, where playing in a slam and having lost one trick, declarer, playing against top class opponents, reached a similar position except that it was, AJ10 opposite KXX. The declarer played a lightning fast Jack and LHO played low after a perceptable pause. Declarer ran this and lost to the Queen. There followed, of course, a great argument in which declarer felt cheated against. The defender in question merely stated that if declarer was looking for a reaction, it was not his duty to give him the correct one. Those who live by the sword etc.
Sept. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, arn't you just the nicest person!
Aug. 26, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top