Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Philip McPeek
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The unit was both unable to find a site for the (formerly Lake Geneva) fall regional and lost its site for their summer regional; the board voted to ‘upgrade’ the Schaumburg sectional into a regional (instead of having no regional for the year). Should be back to our regularly scheduled programming next year; I believe sites have been found and confirmed.
Aug. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Where's “discussed it and still don't agree?”
Aug. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Miles' Unbalanced Diamond is worth a perusal; Pete Matthews has a summary (should be near the top if you google ‘unbalanced diamond’ – site hosted by MIT).
Aug. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Problem: A (potentially sleazy) old man “hit on” a young woman by friending her (but not her brother) and this is sexist.

Solution: the old man should hit on some number of young men to balance out the sexism, and must endeavor to hit on young people in a fashion indiscriminate of gender in the future. Boom: no more sexism in bridge.

Win win win.

Now where were those instructions about unfollowing a thread?
Aug. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Frank Stewart has “Who has the Queen?” though I've not actually read it myself.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lot of clubs on 8, but 11 puts 8 to shame.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Countdown to Winning Bridge is Bourke/Smith's primer on counting (1999, MPP).
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's not going to go 1D all pass. Someone at the table has spades. Two-suited hands are difficult to bid by opening 2C, so even very good hands should tend to open at the 1-level in a standard structure.
May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I voted for the third option. Not sure why, but I did.
May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stiff A/K/Q and otherwise balanced (i.e. meeting the definition of ‘natural notrump’) would be legal for basic/b+ but shorter would be illegal. As Ed points out above, ACBL alert procedures govern the announcement and the prescribed announcement is ‘may be short.’ However, if the bid is forcing, the correct procedure would be to alert rather than announce.

Interestingly, although not legal on the basic chart, such a bid would have been legal under the old general charts, where 1-minor was permitted as a ‘catch-all’ opening promising 10+ HCP.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fred
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Any number of current competitive video games have sidestepped this issue ('the black box algorithm says…') by avoiding publicizing a specific numerical rating but instead lumping players into named rankings (e.g. bronze II, silver III, elite 4…). Sure, ‘bronze’ is arguably a euphemism for ‘below average,’ but even above average players may find themselves ranked ‘bronze’ at the beginning of a ladder season (and will find themselves moving up) or may find that they've decayed to ‘bronze’ status after not playing for some time. The net result is that, for the most part, players don't get overly hung up on their image as ‘bronze’ or ‘silver’ players (after all, most of their friends are also ‘bronze’ or ‘silver’) but have concrete knowledge of their progression within a given season as they move up within their group or into another group.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To be fair, most things are most useful vs. the guppies
April 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's definitely the site I found it from, though its been some years since I've seen it. I don't like a conventional double vs. SC as it delivers a semi-positive XX (or transfer or what not… i.e. extra space) to the opposition with little trade off.
April 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1NT any single suiter comes from a strong club defense called HUNT I found online some years ago. It's basically DONT but notrump bids replace the double.
March 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No alert required in ACBLland; alert procedures only require alerting a 1n rebid which could contain 16+.
Dec. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the alert/explanation was an accurate description of their agreement then the ruling is correct. The opponents are allowed to misbid.
Dec. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not sure what happened. Fixed https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/lead-problem-2-qcgqmschc0/
Dec. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But it meets the definition of your 1 opener
July 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Roy Hughes' Building A Bidding System (recent-ish) gives it a brief nod and cites the relevant book (mentioned above) and bridge world articles. Can track down the references if you're still looking but my copy is in a box.
May 8, 2018
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top