Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Arend Bayer
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd think if Frances Hinden desired to be recognized as on of the best female bridge players, she would have chosen to enter womens' events at some point in her life.
Sept. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Fortunately, the WBF has a policy that anybody refusing to play against any other participant is immediately disqualified, and it is well-known that this policy is always enforced rigorously and consistently.
Sept. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why wouldn't you dare to pass 4? If you have a horrible hand for diamonds, then passing is your best bet even if partner intended it as forcing.
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Josh I am surprsied - what kind of rules are these? It's a natural bid by a limited hand, we don't know of a fit in another suit, and we haven't established values for game.
Sept. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I mean the percentages on the front page.
Sept. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I understand now, and have voted accordingly - but I'd describe my behaviour as “I always look at the results, then sometimes check the comments and who voted for which option”.
Sept. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is still no option that accurately captures my personal preference. I always check the poll results; then I read the comments if I found the problem interesting or if I found the poll results surprising. (I.e., I don't read the comments if I find the problem boring and the poll results are what I expected.)
Sept. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd bet on something like Kxxx x xx AQxxxx.
May 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with what you say. But why does that mean we should lead a diamond? (Which you voted for.) I think it's more likely that they have a 0=6=5=2 hands with two small clubs and partner doubling based on AK, and less likely that they have an 11-card diamond fit. (Would need pretty much 6-6 shape and 2NT overcaller having five diamonds - both possible, but in combination that's asking for a lot I think.)

Edit: I also find it difficult to construct a hand where partner has a diamond void, yet only bids 3S white/red.
Feb. 5, 2016
Arend Bayer edited this comment Feb. 5, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that splintering with a singleton A can work badly, but I think often *not splintering* with a singleton A works even worse!
Jan. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“On balance, opening 1S looks best.” If you think so, why wouldn't you also open 1S the next 20 times you pick up this hand? You have also explained why you think rebidding 2NT after a 2/1 is best.
Jan. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it is worth comparing this to the legal definition of libel. It is legal to say “This publicly available information makes me conclude that Steve Weinstein part of the Russian Mafia.” Saying “I have secret information showing Steve Weinstein is part of the Russian Mafia” would not be.

Here, everyone can look at the hand and video and decide to agree with, say, Woolsey's judgement over Fredin's.
Dec. 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If a player is judged to have intentionally used UI, he should be given a procedural penalty.
Dec. 15, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the US, I would have thought you get just as strange looks from bridge players!
Dec. 13, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my view, the main point is the following. (David, I presume this is what you meant?) It is impossible to explain the heart shift at trick two unless West had already mentally excluded the possibility that partner has a singleton; and West clearly knows this from the UI, and only from the UI.

That does not mean that West *intentionally* used UI. But his heart shift was clearly based on UI, and a director should have ruled accordingly. (Personally I don't think West consciously used the UI about the singleton; if he had thought about the singleton hand, he would have been more likely to realize he can cater for that without cost by cashing the diamond king first.)
Dec. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can someone explain what layout West was playing for? I.e., when is it necessary to switch to a heart at trick two rather than trick three?
Dec. 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think you have this the wrong way round. It seems clear that the 1NT in your auction should be 18-19 balanced. You don't want to force to 2NT with that hand, but you might miss game if you don't have a way to show your values.

If it goes 1x (P) P (1Y), you can safely pass with 18-19 balanced and you know you won't miss a game. And unless 1NT is your spot it also won't be very likely to help you find a good partscore - partner is unlikely to have a 5-card suit (if he could have bid it at the 1-level).

Meanwhile, there is not much reason to bid 1NT with a weak NT in your auction - if you have a doubleton in their suit, you are better off with a takeout double, and if you have three or more in their suit, it is usually fine to pass.
Dec. 9, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I didn't mean this to be a complaint! I know it is difficult, but I also think there isn't much point in fancy improvements to vugraph unless it's a tournament that already does a good job with reliability and accuracy (and many tournaments do!).
Nov. 29, 2015
Arend Bayer edited this comment Nov. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. Reliability. No wifi connection problems that lead to the table being closed in the middle of the hand.
2. Accuracy. No need for lengthy discussion about impossible claims because the operator missed a discard to start with, but also full information about spot cards when a signal might be relevant, etc.
Nov. 28, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I disagree, Nigel. Courts are fallible, too; at the very least, they are often willing to convict on evidence much weaker than what has been presented on bridgewinners on several pairs. B-L were convicted by “court” based on a single hand. Good luck convincing bridgewinners to let you post a featured article accusing a pair of cheating based on similar evidence.

I would call a pair publicly a cheat if I find the publicly available evidence against them convincing. When I have looked at a case closely, I find that a more reliable criterion than whether some court has convicted them.

I also don't get your comment about pack-mentality. Bridgewinners has more than its fair share of contrarians, from what I can tell!
Nov. 9, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top