Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Robin Barker

Robin Barker
Robin Barker
  • 8
  • 3
  • 4
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
May 9, 2012
Last Seen
44 minutes ago
Member Type
Bridge Player
about me

Started playing bridge at Cambridge University in the 1980s.  Started directing at national level (EBU) in the 1990s.  Some directing at zonal level (EBL) in 2000s.  Now (2010s) National TD for EBU and still playing: mainly in teams knockout competitions.

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Opinion on a director's ruling.
I guess I would be asking lots of questions first. Do EW have an agreement about 2? Is 2=majors and East forgot? Is 2=nat and West forgot? (Otherise, why 2?) Did West pick up some unauthorised information after 2 which allowed him to ...
Bizarre insufficient bid
If the statement "I thought you opened 2C" is allowed to inform the TD of a possible attributable meanings of 2D, and 2D is a forced response to 2C, then anything would be a comparable call, because all hands would bid 2D. (I don't like this.) If 3D does ...
Was this ruling correct?
> Which, I think is +3 Imps? Correct? Yes. AVE+ = +3IMP This is law (but can be varied by regulation) "Law 12C2 (b) When the Director chooses to award an artificial adjusted score of average plus or average minus at IMP play, that score is plus 3 IMPs or minus 3 ...
Was this ruling correct?
In England, we might check that the explanation matches the system card, and then we would instruct the auction and play to continue. At the end of hand, the ruling would be AVE+/AVE- [Law 12C1(d)?] unless the score at the table was more favourable for the non-offending side.
Hitchhiker revisited
I expected this article to be about the revived "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" which started this week on BBC Radio 4
Indignor quandoque
Where is the option: "The first statement is a claim. Playing on was not suggested/agreed to by opponents. The original claim stands"
Another ruling case
Apparently, North did think something funny had happened because he asked again about the meaning of 2.
Another ruling case
IF East was not properly alerted about 1NT, then East has done nothing wrong (although East might have been more awake). West has done nothing wrong. So the damage to North/South is a consequence of North's failure to alert and there is no adjustment due to damage from ...
Another ruling case
I suspect > East say he was not alerted by South should be "by North"

Bottom Home Top