Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Phil Clayton
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 264 265 266 267
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Phil: your statement about “arbitrary measurement” is nonsense. If a bid that's not technically a psych according to the laws has the same effect as a psych on an inexperienced player, what you choose to call it doesn't matter.

Barry, when you have to rely on a subjective definition (i.e.,, ‘semantic-based psyche’), instead of a legal one, it's by definition, arbitrary.
11 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Me thinks a losing trump play will result in result in -1.
16 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't know what planet everyone plays on, but here on Earth, psychs aren't terribly common at any level. Not at the club level by social misfits and certainly not at NABCs by sharks many seem intent on segregating into open events. I have never heard of anyone getting kicked

Now, Mr. Rogoff's semantical psychs would probably count in this regard, but since he chooses to use an arbitrary measurement, it becomes a random exercise.
22 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Have we discussed 4N?
22 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know of a few pairs that always bid in tempo except when they are making a conventional call, then there is a slight pause.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry, you don't have to obliquely refer to the stopperless 1N as a psyche to make your point.

Or maybe you do?
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At John Sutherlin's memorial last year, Billy Miller told a story about a hand John played in 3N. He was cold for nine but he wanted to ‘strategically’ run the following suit:

AQT3
K


KJ92
K

So he methodically crashed the K, J and 9 under the A, Q and T, leaving the 3 and 2 outstanding. The general idea is that if one hand had both guarded aces then they would have a guess what to keep for their last card.

Unfortunately, it was John who wasn't paying attention, since one of the opponents showed out on the 2nd round, so these theatrics created a fourth round winner and he went down.
Jan. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And I thought minors was standard. I've also played it as just clubs, keeping the 3 call as a flower - this allows us to drop in 2N if warranted.

Whatever you play, it doesn't come up a whole often.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A splinter would not occur to me. Raises start with 2N or x. Im expecting KQJxxxx across. It's close to a raise.
Jan. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry Len, I thought the present count comment referred to the opening leader.

Still, it's not my preferred use of the club spot. We should be able to work out declarer's pattern by his line of play.

The diamond play is a little weird - it seems like he is trying to get a count on the hand or create communications back to hand for some reason.

Still trying to figure out the title - up until this point our plays have been forced.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Standard count after we lead the lowest card in a suit isn't particularly useful.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, I was not a fan of 2N. I was a lesser fan of 4. My 5N was not in tempo. Clearly we didn't have a agreement about 4.

Bridge is perfect. People are imperfect. We try to our best and hope we make our parents proud.

Yet, my LHO is human too and I genuinely used a similar hand and received a tell that I felt like I exploited.
Jan. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But that's not the case here RR.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jim, this is getting to be a confusing discussion, because hands that cue bid to show a raise and hands that are cuebidding for slam are being discussed simultaneously.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Objection: Counsel is leading the witness.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Doesn't seem like a quantum leap to say, “shows 1st or 2nd round control”.

“Cant be passed” sounds pretty condescending to me.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And Qxxx occasionally works, at least for an 8 card fit.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted
Jan. 14
Phil Clayton edited this comment Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And maybe some of our data miners can come up with non NT grands off the trump queen, and how often a trump was led.
Jan. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think we can create a representative matrix:

Opening leader holds:

Q……never leading trump
Qx…..never leading
Qxx….never leading
Qxxx…never leading
x……seldom leading
xx…..often leading
xxx….very often leading
Jan. 14
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 264 265 266 267
.

Bottom Home Top