Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Shawn Drenning
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not really think this has a whole lot to do with 2/1 GF.

I frequently play it as not explicitly accepting a game try in clubs, but with a hand willing to play in game and something in diamonds.

I would be more interested in what people do if S had bid 3D; then it seems that maybe there is more utility to having 3H be a “last train” type bid rather than something in hearts (but probably pairs with strong agreements have better ways to make game tries than making a naturalish 3D bid that takes up so much space).
Sept. 28, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“If it is agreed that +2210 was overheard,that is substantial extraneous information and the board would be cancelled with both sides treated as non-offending”

This does not really apply in a world championship setting probably, but I wonder what should happen if you overhear someone from the opposing team at the other table make an extraneous comment
Sept. 24, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sylvia: I agree 100% that the event as it currently exists should not restrict anyone. I think the question some are asking (as you acknowledge) is what is the purpose of adding such an event if it will just be the same top players playing and maybe if we do add an event like this it should be somehow restricted to include only “amateur players” (how you define that and enforce it of course not clear).

Personally I would love it if they added an event for 31-39 year olds with full-time jobs who have never been paid to play bridge because I might have a shot (but probably not), but I do not see the point of that event either
Sept. 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Kevin Dwyer, Shan Huang, Adam Grossack, and Oren Kriegel ”

I have nothing against any of these players, but what interest does it serve to give the same players more and more opportunities to compete in limited events? Having junior categories makes sense to me as a good way to give future top players an opportunity for high level competition etc., but at a certain point (imo) they just need to try to cut it in open competition (and all of the players you named HAVE had success in open events).
Sept. 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How can “draw(ing) any legal inference we can from our opponents’ mannerisms” be considered cheating? What is your definition of cheating?
Sept. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it is (highly) debatable whether that makes it more pure. I do not know why it is not “pure” if I (say) work out how to declare a hand in such a way that the opponents give away the layout with their mannerisms. Being able to anticipate opponent's problems and playing in such a way as to maximize the chance they give something away seems like a skill to me and no less of an intellectual exercise than (say) working out the best way to play a suit combination.
Sept. 17, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A lot of well-meaning opponents and partners are skeptical when I tell them after the fact that I could tell what their problem was from their tempo (“I could have been thinking about all sorts of things”). If I tell them what they have before I can see their hand, they are more likely to believe me (not offering an opinion on whether doing this is a good idea)
Sept. 16, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, I get it, but bridgecheaters is a provocative website title. If I made a website called “bridgestatistics” and in good faith published a bunch statistics gathered from top flight bridge events I do not really see how anyone could come after me if some of the stuff I published was suggestive.

That's not to say I do not appreciate the risks Boye and others took (or understand why the approach was necessary). I think ignoring the cheating aspect, I would find a project like this really interesting (just like I was fascinated with baseball statistics as a child). Who doesn't (well, don't answer that) want to see a statistical model that attempts to establish once and for all, who is the best declarer in the world?
Sept. 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So I guess it's better if someone approaches this with the goal of being a Bill James like figure in the bridge world. If it just so happens people draw their own conclusions about some of the data gathered . . . oh well.
Sept. 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I understand that accusing people of cheating is a touchy subject and also that data/statistics can be misinterpreted, but why not publish the data you have with names attached and appropriate disclaimers on how to interpret it? I liked the idea that Fred Gitelman had of asking player's permission to have their name attached.

For instance, I remember looking at some of the stats (e.g. http://www.rpbridge.net/9y82.htmz) Richard Pavileck kept before the cheating scandals broke and wondering why some of the most respected pairs were not ranked higher. At the time I concluded that (as he acknowledged) the approach was not perfect and the sample size was small, but also that maybe people's subjective impressions of which pairs were the best were not always right. Looking now, I draw a different conclusion . . .
Sept. 14, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems consistent with Richard's comment above that the guy named France would bid this way.
Sept. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You cannot bid 2S here in French standard? Do they ever raise with only 3?
Sept. 12, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I admit I find it grating on BBO (or live) when after the hand dummy offers “well played partner” right after we've botched the defense
Sept. 9, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Curious roughly what percent of the population is “mediocre” in your eyes?
Sept. 8, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think what OP did was very much in the spirit of what we are trying to encourage even if his execution was poor. I think it should be distinguished from a lot of behavior that I think is worse and more detrimental to the game (which is my objection to its characterization by many in this thread).

To use a (silly) example from football, I think it would be “outrageously” out of line if OP looked up information about his opponent's significant other and implied before the hand that he was having intimate relations with him/her. Yet this is apparently something you can do in college football and NOT get penalized (https://www.complex.com/sports/2019/08/jalen-ramsey-says-he-sent-dms-to-opponents-girlfriends-before-games-in-college). So I am not sure I buy the analogy to football/other sports where I think ‘trash-talk’ is generally accepted as being part of the game.
Sept. 8, 2019
Shawn Drenning edited this comment Sept. 8, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, I agree, but a cursory browse through the comments shows at least three much liked comments describing OP's behavior as “out of line” (one commentator even adding outrageously!) along with comments suggesting he owes his opponent an apology. I try to follow a variation of Michael R.'s golden rule (don't piss people off for no good reason) so I agree that it would be better if OP kept quiet, but people are acting like he committed some sort of heinous crime.

I also remember hating how patronizing some people were to me when I started playing bridge (and I was older than OP) so I have a hard time having much sympathy for anyone who (by OP's description) has such a toxic attitude towards the idea that someone younger than her might actually be able to teach her something.
Sept. 7, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I try not to offer unsolicited advice either to strangers, but I think everyone on this thread needs to lighten up and stop being so sensitive. I do not think OP's comment was particularly rude and if she was not interested in hearing it (as I might be too if I just botched a hand) she can just say ‘No’ and move on.
Sept. 7, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have the agreement that X by the preemptor shows a desire to bid on in competitive auctions. Have not discussed this specific auction, but in the absence of a different agreement, would fall back on that.

I would probably pass now and later; this hand has defensive potential and we could easily be going for 500 or more in 5H.
Sept. 4, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why?
Sept. 1, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He will not necessarily know that your hand is so suitable for slam in any of three suits though.
Sept. 1, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top