Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Yehudit Hasin
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 213 214 215 216
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4NT, 2 places or X.
:)Yu
12 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Again, as I understand the judge did not say anything about cheating, nor cleared them. The judge ruled that WBF did not follow its own rules (which is also form of cheating I would say).

:)Yu
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whatever is your systemic diamond lead
:)Yu
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is funny !!!:)

I often observe that people at the bridge table are not exactly self aware: what looks normal tempo to the bidder may or may not be to the other 3 people at the table. Obviously your opponents thought you did not bid in the same tempo and manner that you bid the pass over 1.

It does not matter why they think that something was wrong, and whether it was or not. Calling a director is never a reason to be pissed. Not calling a director on the other hand….

:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why would you be pissed by a director call? It is the right thing to do whenever anyone has a concern about anything at the table. There is absolutely nothing wrong about calling a director, and your opponents did well to do so.

As a side note - you do not need to bid or deliberately wit. Bid in your normal tempo. If you waited for a while, then doubled then your partner removed it - I would also reserve my rights.

:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nothing is sure, but sure is not the standard required by bridge regulations.
:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As others stated - no it is not correct. Whenever the tempo suggests one possible meaning over another it is UI. In this situation fast X tends to be clear penalty and slow “I don't know what to do but do not want to sell to 2”.

In the case when the bid is pass, there is always UI, because the alternative is to bid on (something, anything). But in many other situations fast and slow bids indicate rather specific UI or suggest one meaning over another is more likely.

:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That it is not a penalty double…
:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Art, it is a simple matter to change, nevertheless it has not been. My sentence does not mean it has to be that way, just that currently it is.
If you disagree with that I believe you are are wrong, but there are more competent people on BW than I to comment on this.

:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, individuals are not members of WBF. NBOs are. Organization can't ban someone who is not a member.

About your example - if in your bylaws there is nothing about cheating, why a person joining your club should be banned for something you do not specify the punishment for? Do you think it would be ok to ban them because you think they *might* be cheating? Or because you just do not like them? And if the livelihood of that person depends on being member of that club? Or may be because you just do not like the way they dress?

I think if this is a public club, you should have clear rules of what is allowed, what is not, how you referee disputes and what is the punishment - and those rules should be binding to both sides. If you do not specify in your bylaws prohibition of specific type of behavior or conduct, you should not be able to make rules and punishments on the fly.

As much as I hate cheating, having someone doing as they please sounds even worse to me than having a cheating pair. May be I am being cynical, but I do not believe these are the only cheating pairs anyway…

:)Yu
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
WBF silence on this is deafening.

:)Yu
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“So what if the WBF did not follow it's own rules” - John, you are kidding right?

I understand and share the frustration at the current situation, but having WBF (or ACBL or any other club….) do whatever they want at every particular moment in time, without regard to their own charter seems like a sure way to lose all validity.
I would prefer the organizations I am joining actually follow the rules they set.

:)Yu
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, I don't want cheaters in the game anymore than you.

But unlike you, I believe that the problem is not the German government, but the code and organisation of WBF. Note that the court did not rule they did not cheat, it ruled that WBF does not follow its own rules - and I am not surprised. I think more than once I commented that imo that organization is beyond salvation, and harms the game.

So I do not believe that banning NBOs from WBF competition is a good idea, nor do I think it is their fault that WBF's code and implementation is lacking. It maybe a valid emotional response, but it is not a solution. Moreover, banning individual NBOs seems to me to be a great way to encourage them never to catch cheaters.

It is a really complex problem, that unlikely to have a simple and effective solution in the near future; but whatever that solution is it must include WBF taking responsibility. Banning NBOs would be a big step in the wrong direction.

Just out of curiosity, do you think ACBL polices their players well?
:)Yu
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard, care to elaborate with data and suggested auctions?

Because in several years of playing so with every partner, I am yet to find more than handful of hands where it demonstrably cost us; however the ambiguity cost us virtually every time beforehand.
:)Yu
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In normal GF (without the overcall) I play that 1-2-3-3 auction is a cue (actually for us it is non serious, but the same idea). Not double fit, not choose a strain and not anything else.

True, hearts may be the best feature of a hand with support, but that support is at most 3 cards - so on 1-2-3 you found as good of a heart fit as spade one and often the heart fit is 9 cards while spade is 8. When that is the case, playing hearts you will have more pitches or ruffs out of spades, but a 5-4 side suit is not going to produce extra tricks too well. So having the option of going back to spades is not worth it to versus the ambiguity and inability to bid control (A or K, not shortness) in partner's primary suit.

Here there was an intervention, and in that position I feel it is even more important to show support immediately, rather than any other feature of your hand. If you bid hearts (i.e. major) you should be prepared to play in that major if fit is found, or it was not worth mentioning. Fit is the primary consideration for competitive bidding that gets very high very fast. I can bid hearts after I showed spade support for partner to chose, but I can't show spade support after showing hearts without forcing the auction one level higher - which is why I would consider 3 as 100% forcing, whether it is “choose” or “control”. If responder mentions hearts they should be prepared to play in them.

:)Yu
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So David, what would be the standard for “policing their players and the game” - or is it arbitrary notion up to personal opinion of some WBF official (e.g. Rona?)?

I don't particular care how this punishment scheme is called. There is certainly lack of institutional control in the game, but that is not because of individual NBOs - the current WBF institution is a problem.

:)Yu
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It sounds really bad. But, also I can't get to the link (it keeps complaining about something in German…). Can someone maybe post an actual translation?
Is it the same as in March? http://neapolitanclub.altervista.org/eng/ev-eng/elinescu-wladow-affaire-verdict-announced-court-cologne.html
:)Yu
Nov. 15
Yehudit Hasin edited this comment Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, putting aside that I am not a fan of collective punishment, for how long?

:)Yu
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“But more importantly, at least for USBCs, we will be using tablets for bidding in the next year or two and then the contract and declarer will already be there, so all a player will have to do is enter the number of tricks taken to add the score. Much easier than Bridgemates.” - agree, and think it is even better!


“I'll think about one huge database that's online, but I think you underestimate the number of names involved - our BBO database of names, pictures & biographies has about 800 names at the moment, and it definitely doesn't have everyone we see even at NABCs. ”
Define huge, because 800 is nothing for a database Jan. Even excel (not a database program) can store way more than 100,000 entries, with easy look up. So unless you are planning to put all names of all members of all potential NBOs, it is solvable on that level.


“ I'm pretty sure that it will be easier for operators to have an electronic list of the players, sorted by team, who are playing at the time the operator is entering names. That will be 10 teams for the Reisinger final, 8 or 16 for the Senior KO, which is manageable. Obviously, I can have a giant database of full name –>screen name to use to create that smaller database.” - whatever works best in your setting and is more intuitive for you.

“ I'll look at how easy it is to use drop downs in Excel - so there could be an Excel document with just 10 lines and you could click on the team at your table and then select a name to copy?”
Yes, I believe so.

Again if you need help, PM me.

Shireen- now if only ACBL allowed the use of smart phones…
:)Yu
Nov. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ok, thank you.
This was not really a hand I held, it was proof of concept for a different thread that this is a possible hand for bidding 4. The only thing I know about the system employed at the table that it is “simple and natural”….

:)Yu
Nov. 15
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 213 214 215 216
.

Bottom Home Top