Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Steve Chen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Typical setting is to use cell phone (or a second laptop) for skype video, the main laptop has only BBO running at those matches. This way, the occasional video freeze doesn't distract players much.
Aug. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Partner hopefully doesn't have too many minor suit losers. A typical hand is something like x AKQxxxx AKx xx, would you rather be in 4 or 4? Even if you give partner another spade, say xx AKQJxx AKT xx, 4 may still be better. Bottom line: partner showed a single-suited hand and didn't ask me to correct. You can certainly construct hands where 4 is the winner, but it is far from being obvious, and likely wrong.
Aug. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For all that I know, partner can be holding 9 solid hearts… why would I ever think that spades are going to play better (or have less losers)?
Aug. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the poll. Shouldn't you pass 4 regardless of the hesitation? Let's say partner bids in tempo, would you even consider bidding 4 with that moth-eaten suit then?
Aug. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The second club, and lack of 5th diamond, make that hand significantly weaker.
Aug. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is no scientific way to find out below 4. So I am just going to keycard and bid slam if we don't miss 2 keycards.

BUT, I don't know how to keycard NOW. 4NT would be quantitative. I should have bid 4 last round followed by 4NT…
Aug. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Most people play 2 at this vulnerability to be wide-ranging, which makes it difficult for either opponents to double us – his partner can easily have a yarborough, and there is no assurance that we haven't missed our 4 game!

That being said, even without double, -300 is probably not a good score. On the other hand, the nuttiness should not be decided on a single board…
Aug. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This basically boils down to choice of methods.

If playing multi-tier splinter, you can splinter with this hand with whatever range is appropriate (for my method, I bid 4 to show 12-15 high cards in other 3 suits, so this hand seems fit). If not playing that, but playing some version of Jacoby 2NT which gives more information than “4M just shows minimum without stiff”, that can be a choice. If neither of the above applies, then 1) it may be worthwhile to adopt one of those; 2) start with Jacoby 2NT planning to pass 4 response – if that approach misses slam, maybe this is a good opportunity to convince partner a more sophisticated forcing raise structure is needed.
Aug. 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Mike: I wasn't referring to Patrick's method. I was wondering about what Steve Moese wrote (“if over west’s immediate raise to 3 East expresses doubt by bidding 3 (1 ask 2 show)”)… To me, since 1 ask 2 show, and hearts is the only suit bid by opponents, it should be “ask” but not “show”.
July 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The real danger is dummy showing up with KTx in clubs, and declarer holding Ax(x). Very annoying. That being said, I still think club lead gives us best chance.
July 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why does East's 3 express doubts in clubs? Using the quoted “1 ask 2 show”, doesn't 3 asks for heart stopper?
July 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But not being able to bid 5 doesn't mean 5 is not a good game!
July 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why is this “not a good game to bid”? It only goes down when diamonds are 3-0 and K is off. Given that North opened, game is cold at least 95% of the time. How to get there is not totally clear (how about West not passing 2 at least?), but I think 5 is an excellent game.
July 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is also educational foundation pairs/teams the day before real national event, that is a good chance to warm up, if needed.
July 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How much for the rubber bridge session?
July 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think what she meant was, her issue was resolved this one time by contacting ACBL, but a more permanent solution is more desirable, such as changing the wording to remove any ambiguity in CoC.
July 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think synchronizing with GNT is possible. GNT starts way earlier at unit/district level, its cutoff is based on a cycle last year (September cycle?), it doesn't make lots of sense to apply the same date for LM pairs or mini-Spingold held in July this year.
July 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is not about whether playing up benefits a player. This is about choices to have. I can understand the frustration. Certainly the wording of CoC can be made better and clearer. One lesson to learn is to seek clarification on ambiguous terms rather than to assume.
July 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, captured from NAP CoC:
The June 2018 masterpoint cycle is run by ACBL data processing on May 6, 2018. Any points
won but not included in this cycle do not affect masterpoint eligibility.

Of course the LM pairs event has its own CoC, but the definition for “masterpoint cycle”, or “run of the month”, should remain consistent. In this case, it should be the ACBL data processing on June 6, 2018.
July 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, I think very few will agree with you that we should assume everyone is cheating. Not tolerating cheater is very different from assuming everyone is a cheater.
July 18, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top