Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Chris Miller
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 37 38 39 40
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not “trying to get” anything. I'm trying to determine the probable outcomes. I have no problem with -2300, and I doubt that North-South would be short-changed by that ruling.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aviv, I don't know, which is why I am asking. I try to find out what better players than I (in particular, peers of the presumed offender) make of the auction before making a ruling and especially before awarding a procedural penalty.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the weak extreme 2-suiter is a live possibility, then should West bid 4 over 4?
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I understand that the issue over 4 is problematic, to be generous to West, but we still need to understand what he can legitimately assume when he comes to the decision. Does 4 have to mean “oops, I forgot to open the bidding” now, or is there some other possibility that actually fits the auction?
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The fact that East is a passed hand is significant. What sort of hand can West legitimately expect East to hold based on the authorized information? Should 3 be a lead-directing club raise opposite a natural 3?
Oct. 18
Chris Miller edited this comment Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bizarre. On an auction where 2 could be made with NS having a 0-0 fit, it is defined as “natural”. I do not dispute that the regulation exists, but it baffles me.
Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am puzzled by the East's assertion that the double was “take-out”. Take-out from which implied suit? If South has a weak two, the suit is unknown, and East presumably needs no more than three hearts to invite game opposite a weak two b hearts. Did it, in East's view, show short spades, short hearts, or a minor two-suiter? Granted that East had none of those hands, of course.

And if NS are entitled to assume that the double is take-out, the same question applies: take-out of what?

West should have alerted that this was an undiscussed auction, but I think NS were the architects of their own downfall.
Sept. 15
Chris Miller edited this comment Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From a less eminent authority, that comment might be viewed as supersilious.
Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Law 81C3
Director’s Duties and Powers
The Director (not the players) has the responsibility for rectifying irregularities and redressing damage. The Director’s duties and powers normally include also the following:

to rectify an error or irregularity of which he becomes aware in any manner, within the periods established in accordance with Laws 79C and 92B.
Sept. 13
Chris Miller edited this comment Sept. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Late-night idiotic comment deleted
Sept. 3
Chris Miller edited this comment Sept. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Page 5 "cash 3 heart tricks before leading the queen of spades …"
Sept. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No doubt. The defence was a jewel, of course. They found the double-dummy worst (or equal-worst) lead with 100% accuracy.
Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since 8 tricks had been played before the hearts were run, declarer apparently conceded trick 14 to the defenders' carefully preserved club.

In any case, he apparently did no worse than had he called his 7-card suit “trumps”, when he would have had little hope of avoiding the loss of 2 clubs and 3 hearts in the absence of a very helpful defence.
Aug. 27
Chris Miller edited this comment Aug. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would hope for something on the lines of “Natural and game forcing, normally at least 4 clubs with longer clubs than hearts, unlikely to have 6 spades, and with no particular inference about high-card strength”, or whatever the corresponding systemic agreements are, provided that those agreements have actually been discussed and are not “just bridge” guesses.
Aug. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, provided that the director informed him correctly.

East would be choosing to pass knowing that West is entitled to know that East made the same choice over both a natural 1 and an artificial 1. It is very hard to see any possible way that EW could be damaged by this.
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
16C1 For a non-offending side, all information arising from a withdrawn action is authorized, whether the action be its own or its opponents

East does not get any protection after making his own ruling based on ignorance or misunderstanding of the Laws. Rule One: when an irregularity occurs at the table, call the director. Rule Two: see Rule One.
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He was right to claim when he did; had the opponents gained advantage, he was protected by 50E4.

I agree with Dale that, in this case, the director probably judged (correctly) that no such advantage had been gained.
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
68B1 Concession Defined

Any statement by declarer or a defender to the effect that a side will lose a specific number of tricks is a concession of those tricks; a claim of some number of tricks is a concession of the remainder, if any. A player concedes all the remaining tricks when he abandons his hand.
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No; the relevant clause in this case is 63A4:
“when agreement is established (as per Law 69A) to an opponent’s claim or concession; the offending side having raised no objection to it before the end of the round, or before making a call on a subsequent board”

That requires both defenders to agree. There is a distinction between a concession and agreement to a claim.
July 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In the abstract, if 4 sets of boards were available, an 18-table and a 16-table web would have everyone playing 24 out of 24 (using the version with a skip after round 6).

However, one consideration with Fast Pairs is that 3-board rounds may be preferred because there is less overhead time in round changes.
July 29
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 37 38 39 40
.

Bottom Home Top