Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Weishu Wu
1 2 3 4 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
These are all good points, except East insists playing natural 2NT in almost all competitive auctions, so that option is out. He also doesn't like fit-showing jumps so on another board he left me in 3 after (1)-1-(2)-3 so I played 5-1 trump fit.

As for the argument that 5 is to help partner to bid in case opponents bid again, I am afraid that doesn't help much as opponents' suit is , I could not bid 5 should either opponent compete again.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I feel a little better to see so many people here voted for a diamond shift. That probably explains why my partner, East, was so upset after I simply played the last . I think this sets up two tricks in , or 1 plus my 10, while playing a probably would get us only one trick, same as giving my partner a ruff. Here is what my partner had: KJx A876x Kxx 103.

From trick 4:
W N E S
5 4 2 q
3 q k x
2 5 10 j
6 q k x
6 a 6 x
6 8 x 9
10 10 7 x
After that East still scored his j. Down 2 for 200.

Can possibly declarer do better? Maybe I missed something, but I still can't see why a would be a hopeless defense, if not superior to shift. J became irrelevant, didn't it?
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Phil, want to guess again the result? What if I give you another clue:East had SJ too. I’m not sure this is a safe assumption from declarer’s play on trick 3
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just fixed it. Thanks David for proof-reading
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So far a diamond is the overwhelming choice. Can I conclude that playing the third heart is a hopeless choice? If you agree, please ‘like’ this comment
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That might be a good choice too. But at the table, this trick was played too fast for West to duck smoothly
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
EW use udca. At trick 1, dummy played 4 and declarer played 9.
Sept. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I will be in China during that time frame (9/21-10/3) but I have no good partner. In case you need only 1 more I can arrange my trip to stop by WuHan. Good luck!
Sept. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was expecting or hoping for a ruling from the district like this:

Declare team Gupta as the winner as all the other alternatives seem not practical: sending two teams to Vegas, or having a playoff on site or online, or finding enough grounds to declare finn’s team as the winner without void the updated CoC, etc.

Take some responsibility for causing all the confusions and troubles.

Give the other team an auto berth to next year's GNT district final to Sunday.

Abandon VP method to avoid future troubles.
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also played that year. I clearly remembered there were six teams divided two groups. The reason I remember it clearly is I was stupid enough to assume two teams, instead of only one team instead, would advance to day 2. My team was in the same group of Phil’s. When I talked to my partner about “all we need today is to beat the third team” then he told me only one team would qualify. But it’s already late in the second half!
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some don’t want to spend the money and/time to play for the 3rd place. And some don’t want to be the the 4th, leaving for home empty handed. I just realized this 12 days ago
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I fully agree that the CoC were “at best unclear”, otherwise they didn't have to update them on 5/31. In addition, the DIC would not use the wrong VP scale to start with and declared Finn's team as the winner (the original VPs were 26:25:9). OTOH, based on the fact that the district updated the CoC, the outcome of this ruling is not a surprise to me. After all, based on the UPDATED CoC, team Gupta is the clear winner, as the updated VPs now stand as 22:23:15.

But, I am still very surprised that the ruling was based on the claim that “The first three issues will be addressed, but the District and the ACBL have determined that they do not affect the outcome”. Really? At least the lack of a well defined CoC has everything to do with all the troubles here. In addition, while we can't say that determining a winner based on VP is illegal, but if such a very unusual method was indeed used for 3-way final, it should be made crystal clear to all the participants, or at least all 3 team captains.
June 8
Weishu Wu edited this comment June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
First of all, partner has ST. Second, this is probably the only type of hands to better the contract: a better suit plus the K to protect.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
oh that’s mixed teams. The open team also had two days RR but there was no half time after day1.
June 7
Weishu Wu edited this comment June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Debbie, check with Michael. He’s playing his third team trial this year: one second place, one first place, and one more second place or better finish will put him into a very troublesome position, which we all can be very envious
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ellis, Finn’s interpretation is perfect. If you read the updated CoC carefully, the “see 3-team format” will produce two teams after the second day. You will have to have another day or a long Day 2 to finish the final final.

I agree that it’s not the intent but it’s a totally different story.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
USBF did post the VPs after day 1 (a 2-day RR event) for the open USA2 too. Then they updated the VPs on Day 2.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Besides, with most VP scale tables, a team with net positive IMPs in a 3-way match will be winner. Only with this 26-32 board 20VP scale a team with net negative IMP becomes a winner, which is indeed very rare.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Finn, I meant stratify-wise, VP or net IMP won’t make a team bid/play differently. You would always try your best to maximize your margin of victory, especially against the weak teams. But W/L is different. Trying to win based on your current (or half time) results is the only goal.
June 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rick, this is like a very hard homework. I doubt a solution, if any, will get everything right and be final…
June 7
1 2 3 4 5
.

Bottom Home Top