Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Dave Waterman
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 246 247 248 249
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Their explanations without being asked was the issue. That you can get stopped, and should.
July 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some people would double the first time with a hand too good to overcall 1nt.
July 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a club director I would be delighted to provide a setting where these players can:

1) practice/perfect their complicated system
2) practice proper alert procedure.
3) practice the wording of their answers when asked.
4) be an example for others.

Moreover, the opponents get a chance to:
1) practice timely requests for information
2) practice the wording of their requests.

If someone complained or wanted the opponents to stop alerting, I would pretty much tell them what a said above. I would refrain from saying I am sorry compliance with disclosure rules is such a bother.
July 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
North has done fine. It was an OBAR and he showed the pointed suits Partner won't be punishing North for doing what he should have done. North is done.
July 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps DS is confusing two things. When we are asked what PARTNER's bid meant, and pressed further, we should disclose alternative bids she might have made, but didn't. This is after the fact, and might be useful to the opponents.

We are not to predict the future; this can only help refresh partner's recollection of our methods. The ACBL goes further, by demanding that we not alert the 2nt asking bid after our weak two Opening, and demanding that we not alert a 2 response to 1nt (whether Puppet or regular).

Partner alerts the responses to these asking bids, and explains all about what they meant AFTER THE FACT.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, what you are quoting does not apply to letting them know what your upcoming bids will mean.

1) 2nt response to weak 2 asks. ‘asks for more information’ good, ‘asks for a feature’ bad.
2) “asks about a singleton” good; “asks me to bid my singleton” (or bid suit below singleton) bad.
3) Your partner's RKC is asked about before you respond. “1-4-3-0” bad. “Asks for key cards (aces and king of trump) good.
4) ”Forces me to bid 3" – that one is fine if it is true.

The idea is clear. In answering the opponents' inquiry you don't get to alert partner as to what the bids will mean, even if you are just confirming your agreement.
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Asking about four and five card majors” is best, and Terry does that – granted. But they are not entitled to know what responses will mean when they occur before they occur.
July 25
Dave Waterman edited this comment July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I am supposed to bid a five card major if I have one and bid 3 diamonds otherwise.”

Cute, typical anecdote in your post; but no matter how many times they ask, I cannot and will not tell them (and partner) what my future bids will mean. Merely, “asking me about my major suit situation” — and then if they persist, “she is checking back about majors, usually enroute to 3nt.”
July 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You missed the point. Once 2 is rolled back, there can be no weighting of possible bids by South other than 3 because 2 was no longer a legal bid.

Calling it illegal if it has been rolled back is just terminology, then we get on with life.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good points. Partner, however, is better placed to pull with a strong or long Minor when she knows I have no stop – while she will probably suck it up and pass with a run of the mill 1nt.

But here's the thing: I can't ever remember bidding 2 over 1nt (strong) with a single running suit which I would rather cash.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yep. The term ‘ethics’ doesn't need to be used. E/W are damaged if 2 doesn't score as well as 3.

Whether E/W should be bidding is a non-issue; they didn't.

Whether South had a logical alternative after 2n, which should have shown more strength, and might well have gone on to game – but he had derivative UI – is irrelevant because 2nt is already ruled illegal.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“When official scores are posted, however, they should be final.”

This doesn't address the problem of reporting versus fact.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike is preparing his next feature article to be published in 8 months and about a week. The announcement will be that since the results of the LM Pairs dragged on so long, it was deemed a concurrent event with the Spingold, costing him over one hundred MP.
July 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yeh, it probably was. Kandler undoubtedly borrowed it to describe what he advocated for advancing 2nt overcalls.
July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Debbie. Sorry, Alan, for assuming you ever reported your match results.
July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps some people could do better with derivates of ‘conspire’ than with ‘collusive’.

Lawyers (sorry) for instance, note that an element of conspiracy is the taking of a step to activate it.

The recent definition actually only covers illegal communication about hands in play. There are other ways to collusively or conspire to cheat. You can conspire to affect the outcome of an event in favor of one contestant or another.
July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On 2nt overcalls or on 1nt balances, we choose suit bids to be natural and forcing – cue of their suit=stayman.

We were told back in the covered wagon days this is called ‘approach forcing’.

OOOps. correction. approach forcing only after 2nt overcall…natural and NF after a balancing 1nt.
July 23
Dave Waterman edited this comment July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps you can tell us whether the TD to whom you report even asks the score.
July 23
Dave Waterman edited this comment July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Current residence, country of origin,MLB team, or side in the War between the states? I vote for dentists' patients.
July 23
Dave Waterman edited this comment July 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You were chastised for suggesting a way of looking at a ‘not played’ board by some pedant. The bottom line is the same. Someone might find a .0001% difference.
July 23
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 246 247 248 249
.

Bottom Home Top