Join Bridge Winners

Bridge Winners Profile for Roland Voigt

Roland Voigt
Roland Voigt
  • 4
  • 22
  • 62
  • 0

Basic Information

Member Since
April 11, 2015
Last Seen
July 7, 2018
Member Type
Bridge Player

Bridge Information

ACBL Ranking
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
Another UI situation...
Narrowmindedness in perfection. In David's world there seem to be only two alternatives, the Dark Ages or this supposedly bright future where players found guilty of thinking are shot where they stand. I would expect a person who has been playing and administering bridge for forty-odd years to realize ...
Another UI situation...
Anticipation does not solve nearly as many problems as one might be tempted to believe. A long time ago I learned that it was a good idea to think before bidding Blackwood to anticipate the responses and plan ahead. Very recently, it has been suggested that the BIT before bidding ...
Another UI situation...
I cannot imagine ever playing a game that David directs, but if I were forced to, I would probably make the first call/play that comes to mind on most occasions. The chance that it happens to be the right one is higher than the chance that I find it ...
Another UI situation...
David keeps telling himself (and others who make the mistake of listening) that he acts only in the best interest of the game. In truth, if all the directors would rule like David in UI cases, it would be the death of bridge.
Another UI situation...
"If South chooses the option that fits his partner's hand, there is evidence of illegal communication." I used to think that David suffers from heavy paranoia, but I was wrong. He is not suffering; he actually celebrates it.
How do you play this suit
If I don't see declarer's hand, I am not declarer. If I am not declarer, I don't play declarer's (or dummy's) cards.
Another UI situation...
Law 16 says that an "unmistakable hesitation" constitutes UI. But, assuming Pass and 3NT from South are the LAs, it does not suggest one over another. The director should rule that the score stands.
How would you rule?
South should not give the impression that the bid explicitly shows something if there was no explicit agreement. However, it would be proper for him to explain inferences from other partnership understandings the opponents might not know about (such as agreements regarding 2 followed by 3). If South ...
Follow-up to "What's the Correct Ruling?"
Are you done with your nitpicking? I could reference a dictionary explaining why I think the bid is illegal, but I am sure there is some smartass only waiting to prove me wrong again about this, so don't bother. The bid violated a bridge law. You make it sound ...
Follow-up to "What's the Correct Ruling?"
It is completely impractical to introduce a rule for one particular bidding situation when there are a hundred more like it.

Bottom Home Top