Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Shawn Drenning
1 2 3 4 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 33 34 35 36
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I may be slightly below the level of the players you describe, but I all the time make a mistake at the table and do not bother making a Bridgewinners poll because I know what the result will be (that there is a clear answer I did not find it at the table). I have also made polls and gotten unanimous responses where the actual action taken was different at both tables (and in some cases one I did not even consider).

I'm all for filing memos (and think you should if you feel uncomfortable about the hand), but I'm really hesitant to draw any conclusions from one hand (like this was a long match, did they not make any questionable decisions that worked out poorly for them?) and if you only looked at the hands where we make a bad decision that works out almost all of us would look suspicious.
April 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Curious what a simulation would show if you replaced the hand with a non-descript balanced 12 count?

Partner is not forced to force game with a balanced 12 count though and there are plenty of hands where opening this hand probably gains (OP's hand, probably a lot of the time when partner is on opening lead etc.)
April 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, at the table it was not obvious to me if that meant bidding 3 or 4
April 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's ugly, but if there are 14 real teams, couldn't you use the Bridgewinners software with 50 “bye” teams?
April 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems the 3 bidders disagree? At the table I was scared to bid 3 because I also thought it would be asking and that partner would bypass 3NT when that was right spot, but I wasn't sure what the alternative was.

At the table I chose X thinking it showed tolerance to defend, but was not purely penalty (not a bid I think is good or want to defend with so much club support).
March 31, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, you are S.
March 27, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, only $.95 for seniors (or so says the 85 year old man who sat next to me on train)
March 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
well, if there was room for everyone to park for $5 it probably would be a much less interesting place to visit . . . the premium should be much higher imo to park downtown in a major metropolitan area
March 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At our table E declared 3nt on a club lead (with no interference). After N won and shifted to a spade, S is marked with six clubs. E unblocked spades, crossed to hand in hearts, played the spade jack and won the spade return. Now on the run of hearts S has to bare either the diamond K or club A, allowing declarer to exit in that suit and score the other minor suit queen. I thought this was a neat ending.
March 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think 3NT is right. At the table my initial thought was 3NT, but I talked myself into doubling on the thin chance we had a slam, which didn't work well (and bridgewinners seems to agree I was wearing rose-colored glasses).

If the auction continues X-4d/4h is 4nt natural? That seems reasonable to me, but our partnership had not discussed (which is another reason not to X).
Feb. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was a strongish club game (so definitely not an expert field, but most of the field reasonably competent)
Feb. 26, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At the table I bid 4 and partner continued 5, all pass. We got a zero when the rest of the field was making seven in various heart contracts and we only made five on marked diamond lead.

Just a sanity checked to see if anyone was eschewing science on this one.
Feb. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I were always planning to take a line I don't think I'd try to get a score adjustment (maybe file a recorder if it were blatant), but playing low towards dummy and then deciding what to do based on what both LHO and RHO do seems reasonable (maybe RHO isnt prepared to underlead his second honor in tempo if he has not been thinking about the hand enough).
Feb. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm happy to see the ACBL listened to the feedback from some of the players who actually participated in this event and lengthened the time you had to complete the boards. To make things even better and address some of the concerns in this thread (although undoubtedly people will find new things to whine about) I think it would be nice if each set of 24 boards could be played 8 at a time throughout the day (with a shorter time limit).

That said, I am not convinced increasing the time really increases the chances of unscrupulous behaviors all that much.
Feb. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So people play xx is to play and demands a pass and passing is just a suggestion to play 5dx and everything else is as if they didn't interfere?

At the table N redoubled, but unsure if we were on same page I pulled as S. Both 5d and 5s are down
Feb. 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
5 shows 1 or 4 spade key cards, not diamond key cards
Feb. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe he doesn't want N to get a chance to make his next call (which surely isn't passing out 2ntx)?
Feb. 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unfortunately, I do not know. At the table there was a BIT by north over 2, which is reason for poll.
Jan. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems you are not convinced “Mr. Sharp” made an honest mistake, so regardless of the ruling it seems like this is worth filing a recorder form (or whatever the equivalent is in your jurisdiction). One hand doesn't really mean anything, but if he really is being “sharp” here it probably isn't the first (or last) time something like this has happened.
Nov. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Heh, I don't like, but that's fine. To me there is a big difference between optimizing the bidding when opponents do not bid because they likely wouldn't bid and when they don't bid because the model enforces it. How much this affects results I don't know, but I know in real life if I knew opps would never bid I would probably change my approach quite a bit.
Nov. 23, 2017
1 2 3 4 ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 33 34 35 36
.

Bottom Home Top