Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Peter Jan Plooy
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 35 36 37 38
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Knowingly accepting a trick you are not entitled to? Is that in the Laws?

Or knowingly letting the Correction Period expire, so the director cannot correct the result in accordance with Law 69.B.2?

Edit/add: second paragraph.
16 hours ago
Peter Jan Plooy edited this comment 16 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously the penalty trick makes a difference for the result. I meant: if the revoke itself doesn't produce an extra trick for us, there is no reason to hang yourself. No damage done.
16 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve,

You know you revoked, but no one notices AND you got an extra trick. You point it out.

You know you revoked, but no one notices AND it didn't make any difference for the result. You keep your mouth shut.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard, the revoke may not have been deliberate, but checking the claim they must have noticed that a trump trick was conceded that they had no right to. I suspect that that was the reason for the CEC.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, could you please inform us where you do your directing? So we can avoid those events?

The idea that the director can ‘force’ any ill-conceived agreement on my partnership, just to give me a larger penalty, is mind-blowing.

I know you like to overstate your positions, for increased rhetorical effect, but you seem to be out-of-control on this one.
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@GG. “partner thinks and sings off in 4M.”
Well, that got my imagination going…
Time for “Bridge - the opera”?
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aviv, I think you meant to write ‘assess’ instead of ‘asses’…
Nov. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That was my line of thinking too. And so I passed.
Turns out, he was asking for aces, and slam happened to be making on a favourable layout of the spades.

It is a relatively new partnership, and we have now made new agreements, to be able to bid 5+5 majors below 3NT.
Nov. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“the DBF has done more than was humanly possible”
The result of the implied divine intervention is, unfortunately, less then impressive.
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What else? There are no more entries to dummy…
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ken, playing it out would have cost less than a minute. But I suppose it was a good lesson in the workings of a squeeze, which he probably would not have noticed otherwise.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@MK: agreed.

@RF: If you refer to the table size, you are a lucky man. If not, you're not.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bridge tends to be played on small tables, in almost total silence. Everyone at the table hears every mumble.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A selective memory seems to be the order of the day, especially in Washington and Hollywood. Plausible deniability is the name of the game. You deny until clear proof is presented. Then you suddenly remember, but deny the rest that is not (yet) proven.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am actually concerned about N's false testimony regarding the cards that declarer showed when claiming. If N indeed only showed the hearts to the director, and not the spades. Is that worth a PP?
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, for one thing: “it doesn't matter” is not an instruction for dummy, “play anything” is (although not an actual designation of a card).
“It doesn't matter” could be a mumbling to oneself while considering what card to choose.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought the face-down opening lead is also meant to avoid LOOT problems. After it is pointed out that the other defender is on lead, the face-down can be retracted and play can continue without any problems. Do we really have to call the director in such a case? Do we consider this an irregularity?
If it is allowed to retract the face-down card without instruction from the director, it was not a played card after all.
If it is not allowed, there will be at least a dozen extra director calls on any given club session. Who wants that?
Nov. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael, keeping the 6 for reasons of flexibility is a play that requires more conscious thought than just running the suit top to bottom. If something still needs to be achieved in another suit, sure, this could be a possible play. However, if this is the only suit that is relevant, the play is automatic.
By the way, keeping the 6 still doesn't block the suit, so I don't really get your point.
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aviv, the automatic play is from top to bottom from a short side with honours. This automatically solves the blocking in the OP case. The automatic play from the useless dummy in your example is from bottom to top. It requires a conscious thought to unblock the 8.
So these situations are definitely not comparable.
Nov. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMHO playing the short hand from top to bottom before crossing to the long hand is fully automatic. I can do it in my sleep, since just about the third time I played bridge. It doesn't require any conscious thought.
Even using the word “unblock” is a bit of an overbid for this type of play (although a technically correct term, of course).

Frankly, I consider it an insult to suppose that my opponent would mess this up. And I don't like to insult people.
Nov. 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 35 36 37 38
.

Bottom Home Top