Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Richard Fedrick

Richard Fedrick
Richard Fedrick
  • 0
  • 2
  • 9
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
Jan. 24, 2012
Last Seen
an hour ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
United Kingdom

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Puppet/Muppet Stayman Question
2NT-3; 3-3 shows four spades, or 5+4. Then 3 = three spades 3NT = two spades 4X = four spades, max 4 = four spades, nothing special
Common Leb mishap
One of us has the polarities wrong. From where I am sitting West has just followed instructions (puppeted to 3C) while his partner 2-stepped to 3NT, showing clubs along the way. No invitations involved, raise or otherwise.
Common Leb mishap
Absent UI... a) West has seen East show a raise to 3NT with 6+ clubs and some reason for concern (presumably, spade worry) b) East has seen West show a minimum 1NT overcall with five(+) clubs Since we are told that East had four clubs (opposite the presumed 5+ card ...
Risk Over Risk Plus Reward
Terrific! I’ll give you the account details of the escrow account where you need to wire me $10 million of cash collateral, and we’re good to go. Thanks for the trade!
Risk Over Risk Plus Reward
Great (and unexpectedly subtle) question. See also - 'extreme-event' insurance - volatility smiles - why crowdfunding works As has been stated here several times, the theoretical (risk-neutral) probabilities are essentially irrelevant. I teach mathematical finance for a living; my discussion of the pricing of credit tranches always starts with the 'Elvis trade': Suppose ...
What are the benefits of UD Attitude, Standard Count?
It's pretty common in the UK. Standard count is slightly more natural if you systemically lead middle from xxx - playing upside-down, your second card in the suit is either a lie (top of the two remaining) or misleading (suggests your lead was from two-low).
Recommend a partnership style
MH writes "if we accept the premise that each approach will generate roughly equivalent 'thin making games reached' and 'games missed', then..." But this premise is manifestly false. Call 'pass with light invites, move with heavy invites' strategy A, and 'invite with light invites, bid game with heavy invites' Strategy ...
Recommend a partnership style
I'm convinced this is the wrong way round. Especially at teams, the 'heavy' invite has already bid game. So invites will be skinny, and acceptances should require a maximum. I've always had this understanding (it's explicitly specified in my notes), am I missing something?
UI and Logical Alternatives
4H would be a self-agreeing spade slam-try, in the absence of any specific other agreement. I think it *should* be a transfer (weak or very strong, with a direct 4S being a non-forcing mild slam-try), but that requires an explicit discussion.
UI and Logical Alternatives
I will come clean, in an attempt to bring this thread to an end (but the phone lines remain open for those who wish to eviscerate me after what I'm about to write). I was South, and bid 4S (if anyone cares, it's board 19 of the Monday ...
Not following anyone yet

Bottom Home Top