Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Oleg Rubinchik
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you talking about daylong tournament? People play on a different boards, so IMP comparison between field is a joke. Fortunately ACBL Tests Online NABC Event is scored in matchpoints - what sets a board player get will have a bit less importance.
June 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am curious what will happen earlier: the first cat to achieve the life master title or the first dog to became a national champion? ;)
June 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“First, this kind of problem comes up more often than you think although it doesn't usually have this many HCP.”
Hi Dave. “This many HCP” is exactly the main point of that problem. You will not get opportunity to make any follow up bids after your original pass.
June 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am one of the players who enjoy playing with robots and the most probably will try that tournament.
But I still think it is very controversial decision.
There are several obvious advantages:
1.New fun tournament
2.Additional advertisement for people playing on BBO to became ACBL members
3.Additional advertisement for ACBL members to try BBO
4.Additional financial gain for ACBL and (maybe) BBO.
5.Test for new ideas

Unfortunately there several not less obvious disadvantages
1.Profanation. Giving nation titles on not-bridge tournament seems way too much.
2.Issue of trust. Creating new national event conflicting with NABC right before NABC started does not fair toward the people who already paid for travel to NABC.
3.Multiple security issues.
a. Anybody could ask much stronger player for help.
b. If number of participants will be low, probability of related participants getting the same boards are high
4.Tournament fairness:
a. With large number of participants, people will compete on different sets of boards and against very different fields.
b. Robots have well known weaknesses that put people who do not have experience playing with robots in huge disadvantage unrelated to their bridge skills.
c. High randomness in playing with robots.
June 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is even more fun:
CoC 10. The event is played best-hand style: Player always receives the hand with the most high-card points at the table or tied for the most high-card points
CoC 22. This event utilizes deal pools. Not every player will play the same boards.

I personally find those kind of games are fun to play, but I don't think they are bridge tournaments according the definition of bridge.
June 14, 2017
Oleg Rubinchik edited this comment June 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On the first part of the poll we had different vulnerability.
How would you expect West to understand 4 bid now?
June 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, I shared that story too many times, but it is my favorite:

***

Long ago, when my son was a baby and my daughter was 4 years old, we used to play at home: my wife and me against our friends. We even had stakes – losers buy a cake for the next game.
One day my son started to cry during the game and my wife went to feed him. Because it was boring to sit and wait, I asked my daughter Natalie to be my partner. She did not completely master her bridge game yet, but by that time she already learned the main part - how to follow suits and turn the cards.
On the first board, I hold:

A72
763
986
Q1052

I open 1. Why not? My partner does not know even names of suits, so I did not expect her to bid anything anyway. I was wrong.
The Left Hand Opponent (LHO), a very good guy, doubled and Natalie bid 5!
It was the last bid my wife made before the baby woke up and I said something like “very good bid, Partner.” Natalie was there and she learned something new!
However, what should I do now?
RHO passed, I passed and LHO doubled again. Did I already say he was a very good guy?
Natalie said double too. Sometimes kids learn too fast.

“Did you mean pass or redouble?” asked her LHO. (You see, he was a really good guy).

Sure, Natalie confirm she meant redouble and 5 clubs redoubled became a final contract

RHO led with small club.
LHO took Ace, King and continue trumps. As you already well aware, he was a good guy, but somehow he was not the best bridge player in the world.
Natalie, who gave clubs on the first two rounds, asked where she could buy additional cards if she does not have the suit. I explained that in this game if she has no suit she is free to discard any card, so she discarded a small diamond.
I took that trick and made the last round of clubs. (I know, dummy should not play without command, but insisting on that rule was too much, even for LHO.) Natalie gave another small diamond. I played the Ace of Spades and she discards the third diamond.
“Natalie, dear, you should follow suit,” I said.

“I have no black cards anymore,” said Natalie with an insulted voice. “I have only hearts left.”
Saying that she tabled AKQxxxxx.
So, the rest of the tricks was hers, 5 clubs redoubled bid and made on 15 points with 4-2 in trumps!
I don’t think any Grandmaster ever accomplished anything like that.
June 7, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Honestly, it does not sounds for me like they had such an agreement at the moment when player opened 4.
It more likely they read something, heard something and have no ideas what they agreed.
After one of them generated that Gerber-opening monster, it kind of became their agreement and you asked them at that stage. Lucky you helped them to clear up the misconception.

I hope nobody actually made a noise about missing alert from novice pair.
June 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do they have an agreement that 4 opening is Gerber, or novice opener imagined that and responder figured it out based on his clubs?
June 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, it is what I was told. And what about elephant?
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I completely agree with you that person is not allowed to hesitate with equals in order to create illusions he does not have equals.
If South would call director and describe the problem I would be 100% with him. I don't believe he has a case here, but I have no problem with friendly directors call.

What I hate (and that word is not an underbid) is the situation when person DO NOT call TD, but instead blaming opponents to be unethical.
It convers situation with (maybe) technical violation into the personal ethics accusation. Extremely inappropriate.
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nothing, of course. So?
I believe if player had an opportunity to think about some position in advance it DOES NOT make the position “no bridge reasons to think.”
Sure, it would be better for him to think earlier, but who is perfect?
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know East (my regular partner for 17 years who happened to play in that event with other friend) well enough to be absolutely sure that thought ‘if I think here, it might fool declarer’ never cross his mind. He is relatively slow player and has tendency to hesitate in situations that look very simple for me. He explained that he did consider ducking by rejected it. He also was confused by 9, played by his partner. (They were using play low from two small, and West false-carded).

I also have no doubt that East would accept decision by director without any comment. I happened to be in doubts that director could give South something in that position. Note - East played honest Queen, not King after his hesitation.
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you sure there is no bridge reasons to think at that point? You see the distribution, I see the distribution. East did not see the distribution yet. Even if taking the first round of and return looks automatic, some people are more careful than other and try to count distribution before commit the play.
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess South should play bridge and count points instead of assuming that somebody playing unethically.
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a part of organized bridge, we would be happy to accept their time and money. What could we offer them in return? Is there any reason they should prefer expensive, overregulated, time-consuming games with strangers over the funny informal games they already enjoy with their friends? We can invite social player to try competitive bridge, but why would he stay with us?
May 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am playing strong jump shifts with one partner only and we are using artificial relay style continuation after it.
May 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
>Did East alert the Double?
> If no alert, I would reject the assertion …

Before we can make any conclusions from the missing alert on minor+major double we need to know if such double is alertable in that jurisdiction.
May 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
<offtopic>
Joke from the late USSR.
There are two ways how our economy could be fixed - real and fantastic.
Aliens from stars could come to the Earth and fix economy for us or we can fight corruption and fix the economy by ourselves. The second way, of course, is a complete fantasy.
<offtopic end>
May 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you all.
I informed players 4 -1 for both lines.
April 28, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top