Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Csaba Czimer
1 2 3 4 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 20 21 22 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
South cuebid clubs and west did not know that it was a shortness, from his point of view it could have been the king too. Therefore the most probable reason (IMO) to cash an ace from AQ is to have another potential trick, i.e. the trump queen. Well, if East did not cover the 10 with the queen (very improbable) then I congratulate her/him.
Jan. 13, 2017
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Jan. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You may prevent some leakage without blasting:

We (and many other) play second round transfers after Jacoby, that is our 1N-2-2-3 includes inviting hands with 6+. It makes the following possible:

1N-2-2-3: GF with 5 , (near) balanced hand
1N-2-2-3N: GF with 4 , (near) balanced hand
(similar with hearts)

That is we bid transfers with balanced GF hands which contain a 4-card major, and tell about the will-be dummy only, which helps them less.

If you always bid this way then your 1N-2-2-3N will show 4-4 in the majors, which is another information giveaway, although less than the traditional way. But this can be avoided by adopting some sort of mixed strategy: let's say that you normally bid transfer with balanced hands including a 4-card major, but with weakness in the transfer suit you bid Stayman instead to avoid lead-directing doubles. This way 1N-2-2-3N won't always promise 4-4 majors.
Jan. 12, 2017
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Jan. 12, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Second transfer: 4+ , INV+ hand (if only 5-4 and inv, then good suits)
Jan. 2, 2017
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Jan. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My rule is: if our (game) bidding can be based purely on shape then it's not forcing.
Dec. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For (1): I disagree. On desktop version you simply press the home button, no scrolling necessary. On phone I hate when floating or fixed areas cover any part of the screen, which is just small enough without them.
Dec. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
unless the other opponent told your partner that 4N meant this and this. Now partner thinks that they had an agreement, and you may misunderstand each other because of the different information you got.

Anyway, I would never ask this one, it is minors of course.
Dec. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can make 6 even against 4-1 trump split if clubs are 1-1 or the void has only 2 hearts. On a spade lead and AQ behind the KJ you ruff it, play the QJ of hearts, and lead a club (still having a small trump in your hand). If it is ruffed, bad luck, otherwise you can claim (if s are not 8-0).
Dec. 8, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Emily, you should always claim when you have a sure squeeze :). Any idiot can execute a squeeze accidentally, this way everyone will know that you do it consciously :)
Dec. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I he judged to score 9 tricks knowing all his 26 cards, who am I to overrule it without seeing them?
Dec. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The universe is f… big, even the the bidding universe is big enough. Can you allow multiple choice here?
Dec. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(moved)
Dec. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Patrick: we bid this with a spade void.
Nov. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have no problem when you (or anyone else) bid 1 if is alerted (or announced) that occasionally 3 cards.

My view on implicit agreements:
- first time of course no alert on strange bids
- second time you still don't have to alert because you don't know that it just happened again (however you may alert that it already happened once)
- from the third time you should alert

Anyway, I would simply bid 1N and would be completely happy in NV (they can't overcall 1), slightly worried in Vuln.

In my pet system 1-1 is (0-)6-12 HCP, 4+ or 4+ :), because 1-1 is GF relay. I don't think it's playable in ACBL land :) though.
Nov. 7, 2016
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I just created a poll to easily summarize our preferences.
Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think most of us meant “web browser” version when writing “web” version
Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think currently the windows client is better and nicer, but it's just a personal view. If someone prefers the web version or will prefer it later when it is improved, (s)he can switch any time.
(I also find it comfortable to be able to watch BBO on tablet or phone)

How does that helps microsoft that some users prefer excel 2003 (pre ribbon menu) to any newer version?
Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You might have noticed that I only ask for keeping the windows version in its current state, not for maintaining or developing it further.
Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From a software developer's point of view:

I don't understand why they have to completely stop with the windows version. They could simply announce that its development is stopped, but the existing version can be used as it is now. The only thing they should take care is not change the client - server communication protocol in a way that the old clients are not understood anymore.

Anyway, windows (all versions together) has a market share of a bit above 91% among desktop operating systems, which is not negligible.

Windows as a programming platform is not bad at all (about a million times better than web as a programming platform) and is very succcessful. We all know that programming for the web sucks.

At a time many people thought that Java applets were great. Not many people use them now. Later they thought that Flash was great, now it's not supported any more in many browsers. Noone ever thought that javaScript was great, but many of them still have to use it (more and more). Unfortunately it behaves differently in every browser. I understand that in theory a uniform programming platform would be great, but unfortunately it just does not exist currently.

Windows from user's point of view is not bad. Linux is out there for many years and could achieve a 2% market share on desktop despite of being free. Mac is out there from earlier than Windows and has a 6,5% share.

The windows version of BBO - if not maintained anymore - could be released as an open source and interested programmers could maintain it.

So my proposal is: keep the windows version. If you don't have enough resources then don't develop it anymore, keep it in its current state (and maybe open its source code).

From a BBO user's point of view:

I used to play more. Recently I play only occasionally, mostly watch (and sometimes commentate) viewgraph broadcasts, and sometimes use partnership bidding and Bridge Master.

I mostly use the windows version and I like it. Sometimes I use the web version on (android) tablet or phone, but only for watching, not playing. I think the windows version is prettier as easier to use, and the only advantage of web version is the voice commentary.

One more thing: I bought 8 packs of bridge master deals, but they are not available in the web version (tried it just now). It is definitely an issue to fix quickly if the windows version won't be available.

Altogether I find the idea of abandoning the windows version a very bad idea.
Nov. 7, 2016
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Nov. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1 - 1 16+ // 8 - 12, or BAL
1 - 1N Relay // BAL
2 - 2 Nat, denies majors // relay
2N - 3 6+ 1-suiter with a shortness // relay
3 - 3N Short // good stopper
Oct. 30, 2016
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Oct. 30, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think they are the same thing (or very similar). We use it only after RKC for the outside kings and queens (and jacks rarely).
Oct. 29, 2016
1 2 3 4 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 20 21 22 23
.

Bottom Home Top