Join Bridge Winners
Turn the cube?

Browsing the BridgeWinners blogs last week, I noticed JoAnna Stansby posted a link to a research paper. In the paper, a bridge quiz composed by Michael Rosenberg was used to assess a participant's tolerance for risk. The study, which was done at the Boston NABC, was not only scored for bridge but also for risk -- for example, bashing a game or a slam was assigned a higher risk score than scientifically investigating. It showed that men with a certain gene were more likely to take risky actions: more good risks if the man had a lot of masterpoints, and more bad risks if the man had few masterpoints. (While women were also part of the study, there was not enough significant data to draw a conclusion.)

Although the risk analysis is debatable, one of the problems in the quiz piqued my interest when two world-class players disagreed on the correct bridge answer:

Matchpoints, neither vulnerable

1 was natural within a 2/1 context. Do you double, or pass? And what if the scoring were IMPs?

Analysis to follow after the community sinks its teeth into the problem.

Getting Comments... loading...

Bottom Home Top