Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Anthony Taglione
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 67 68 69 70
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Please do, Frances, I'm already chuckling. :-j
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It involved a repeating triangulation with the bishop to give a zugswang to force white to break his own fortress. At the press conference, another GM tried to tell the players about the line but he couldn't remember how it went and even they couldn't see what he was getting at.
Dec. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure what you mean. Carlsen was winning game one until he made a hasty move at the time control, which ceded the draw.
Dec. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think that we have a problem with the format. The games were interesting and of extremely high quality. In times of yore, a drawn end result would be an automatic victory for the reigning champion, which would force the challenger to try for less drawish positions from the opening. As it happened, Magnus crushed him in the tiebreak play-offs.

If Magnus has pulled in the win in game one, of course, the whole match would likely have gone very differently.
Dec. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Laws on hesitation are not generally well understood. As for bidding too quickly, forget it.

I once overheard a player at another table telling the partner of someone who'd had a long think that he was now barred from bidding because his partner had hesitated. I was also told to mind my own business when I pointed out that he was wrong. I then called the TD.
Dec. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
and some games go straight from opening to endgame, anyway.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously, Hal would expound on phenomenology. :-j
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I get that. too, Jim. Recently, I had an insufficient bid at my table and one of the players turned to me and said, “Why don't you just tell us the rules?”. I called the TD. When the TD arrived, he missed out on giving my partner the option of accepting the IB and I silently pointed to my partner while the TD was explaining options to the bidder. The TD said, “Oh, of course you have the option to accept it”

After the TD left, my LHO said, “You could just have told us that, instead of calling the director and telling him what to do”. I can't win.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Ed, Narsingh. It's the director's job to explain penalties and the reasons for them, waive rectification or not and to explain why. Imagine also that a similar situation arises at the next table for the “newbies” and they don't receive the same largesse you've just extended… “We didn't have any problems at the last table when this came up. Why are you making things difficult for us?”.

Let the director do his job and don't try to do it for him.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If it's a simple law ruling then I'll deal with infractions at my table myself. If it's anything more complex then I'll ask another director to handle it for me. If I give a law ruling at my own table and the opponents seem ill at ease about it then I'll offer them the choice of a second view from another director.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't feel that either side has done anything “wrong” if the TD simply doing his job has made a hand unplayable.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Ed says, No Play is not an option. Either play the hand or assign an artificial adjusted score.

Someone above suggested A+/A- but I can't see any good reason why the TD should assign himself an ave-, since he's done nothing wrong. If there are other directors playing, then I'd generally ask them to rule in my stead on a hand I've yet to play. Of course, you can have these these issues arising in an early round and you just have to suck it up and try not to take any advantage from what you've seen.

Equally, if it's a judgement ruling, you can always tell the players that you'll look at the hand later.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing 4cm, I'd not raise on three cards but know many who do. I don't like the method and talk partners out of the idea even if they like it. If the auction went 1-(2)- then I'd bid 2 on three cards if I couldn't find a better bid.

As you, we'd bid 1NT and await partner's reply, if any. The only downside is that partner is not likely to rebid the major with only five of them. This means we sometimes end up in 1NT when 2M is better.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is this in a 5cm context? If I've so far only shown four hearts then 3 shows something partner doesn't know. I'd always have 2NT be natural here.
Dec. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Love it!
Dec. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had one similar the other day…
“Sorry, guys, I bid to a hopeless 3NT and went three off”
“That's okay. We took them four off. Next hand”
Dec. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I see a player berating themselves over a mistake, my usual consolation is “We've all done it and we'll all do it again”.
Dec. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ducking high might be a nice way to to remember the technique but if you're losing the first trick then the H9 is junk, anyway. If you play it to trick one, there's some chance that it's not junk.
Dec. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play a variable NT opener 10-12 and 13-15, although this is in a strong-club context. We open 10-12 in first or second if NV and in third when white vs red. Since we open almost any 11-count, one way or another, your comment regarding partner's known weakness is very valid but we seem to do okay with the method.
Nov. 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It results in a situation where you should only ask for kings if you hold one yourself. There's then no ambiguity, since if partner bids your king then he has the other two. If he bids one of the other two then its the only one he has.

Of course, you might be happy enough to know that partner has at least one king, whatever it is.
Nov. 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 67 68 69 70
.

Bottom Home Top