Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Arend Bayer
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
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The effort of your “detective group” was wonderful, and all but very few bridge players will always be grateful for that.

But it also makes me wonder. Many of the codes that got cracked were extremely simplistic. Moreover, future cheats could always look at these efforts and get a fairly good sense of how complex their methods in order not to get caught. On the other hand, the bridge interpol will have access to many more videos in the future; but then, the interpol doesn't have 10 clones of Brad Moss and Ish Del'Monte to comb through 10 times as many videos.

You must have thought about this much more. Are you optimistic of catching/deterring future sophisticated cheats?
Oct. 29, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing in a club game, the biggest advantage from “1 = could be short” is the inevitable discussion by the opponents “Ok, let's play 2 = natural and 2 = Michaels over that”, with promptly exactly one of them forgetting a few minutes later. I am almost tempted to skip announcing our system against non-experts at the beginning of the round in order to protect them…
Oct. 19, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What a coincidence - Han's guess exactly matches Balicki's distribution!
Oct. 16, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They were about 963 (ok I am exaggerating) The Bridge World editorials about sportsmanlike dumping while F-N and B-Z were winning event after event. Many others about aspects of the law that are obscure, at least when compared to Law 73B. Don't you think they could have used their platform better than that?
Oct. 13, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The hypothesis is “Large gap signals something, one possibility that they have a void in the opponent's suit in a competitive auction”. I.e. if they have a void in the opponent's suit, they will bid with a wide gap; but not the converse. (And note that this fits well with Gonzalo's hypothesis.)

If these seven hands are really all the examples of having a void in their suit in a competitive auction, then this sample is more meaningful than people may realize. (Ball-park estimate: if 1/3 of their bids have a large gap, then the chance of this happening by coincidence is about 1:2000.)
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also thought declarer might go down if West plays a low heart instead of A - he'd play East for a doubleton and protect against Jx behind. But I also understand why West did play the A - he also played partner for a doubleton (3=2=3=5), in which case he has to play A and let partner ruff the third heart.
Oct. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can also skip forward and backward by 5 seconds with the cursor keys. (As usual with web browsers this only works when the right part of the window has keyboard focus, i.e. it only works sometimes and I have no idea why and when.)
Oct. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BZ35: edge;edge;small;medium;medium
BZ36: edge;edge;small;small
Oct. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BZ35, BZ36
Oct. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BZ33: edge;edge;small;small
BZ34: edge;edge;small
Oct. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BZ33, BZ34
Oct. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
BZ31: edge;edge;medium;medium;large;medium
BZ32: edge;edge;large;large;large;small;large
Oct. 3, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top