Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Jackson
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Getting a few different reasons. Poor mesh is a new one. Poor interiors was another. Just have to accept it was another and anything else is ‘resulting’. I certainly don't think the reason these cards have so little play for 3NT is any of these but I am just asking for others opinions. I haven't said why i think it is so but perhaps someone can guess. I don't think it is impossible to diagnose the real reason why it plays so badly for 9 tricks
Jan. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I mentioned in a reply to another comment. I don't think the lack of interiors is the reason these hands don't play well for nine tricks. I am just asking why others think it is so. I haven't said why I had think it is so.
Jan. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well if you think the reason that this is not a good 3NT is because there are no useful interiors (incidentally 4 card suits are considered long suits in balanced hands) then those features are obvious to both bidders so why not take them into account. However, I don't think they are the reasons why this particular 26 point hand plays so badly
Jan. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Perhaps I should have posed the question as ‘Why does a 26 count made up of these premium cards and with good distribution play so badly in 3NT’ And how do you avoid bidding it?
Jan. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ben. We will have to disagree about how good KnR is. Re a simulation comparing the two hands you need to choose partner's hand from the remaining 26 cards not from the cards/hands being tested. Unfortunately simulations are DD outcomes. Basically hands full of Aces and Kings either have the tricks or they don't with maybe a break involved and the defence usually hasn't much say in the outcome. For the quack hands DD defence puts a lot of them down but in the real world many make because the lead and switches are not optimal. If it needs DD defence to beat it (basically it is rated zero percent in a simulation) then in reality it is usually at least 50% likely to make.
Nov. 6, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Opening on AAK assumes you are going to play in a suit. If you are playing in NT the AAK hand is far more dreadful than the quacks hand is for suit play
Nov. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All are an easy Pass. If Partner has 5 tricks you may make 3NT. I see only 3 tricks unless you think Aces and Kings can win a trick more than once. I would open on QJxx, QJx. K10x, Q10x. You prefer quick tricks. I prefer slow. As Leonard Cohen might say ‘You want to get there quick. You want to get there first. I want to get there slow. I want to get there last.’
Nov. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's an easy PASS. You certainly have 3 tricks and possibly a ‘long card’. If Partner has a much better balanced hand than yours and can provide another 5 tricks you might have a play for 3NT
Nov. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The results FN were getting and their Butler Scores were if anything better in 2004-2008 than in 2012-2014. If they are cheating now then is illogical based on any analysis of their results to assume that it began recently. That implies they did better in 2004-2008 (when they won nearly everything) but weren't cheating than they did recently when we ‘know’ they were. If their results NOW are thrown out then it makes complete sense to throw out the earlier results too. That should be made clear by any Investigative committee if they are found guilty.
Nov. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Imagine that in a tournament with prize money (Think of say the World Poker series) the organisers were to say that the winners have cheated so they are disqualified and we are not giving them the Title, or the prize money. However, we are keeping the winners prize ourselves. We are not moving the other places up. Not conceivable.
Oct. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kit ‘It is always bad when the conditions of contest are such that it is to a team’s advantage to intentionally lose a match.'
Conditions are generally badly written in numerous sports. Here not necessary to intentionally lose. England might have turned up 40 mins late and hence penalising themselves x number of VPS but still play their best against opponents. Only damage is to their own score but no benefit to opponents. That might have got them off the dreaded 4th place and an easier last 8 match. Not a great move but better than losing intentionally
Oct. 3, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All may be revealed tomorrow according to the Oracle
Sept. 30, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Tom. Yes. One cheating technique is enough to convict now. But to find out how long this has being going on and to provide evidence for those earlier tournaments where video may not be available one would like to know if there is more to what they were doing in the last few years. Then you know what to look for in those tournaments from several years back.
Sept. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Boye states in his post that for FN ‘It is every freaking hand’ and Boye doesn't bluff. I have seen the damning evidence for the 50% of hands where FN are on lead and use Vertical/Horizontal leads. Have I missed suggestions or evidence that for the other 50% of hands where FN declare that UI is also being being transmitted? Is the arsenal of weapons being used by the outed pairs much greater than we have so far seen?
Sept. 26, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Need many A4 pages to list the total damage to all countries.
Ireland damage.
2006 Warsaw. Silver medal Europeans. Winners Italy with FN
2007 Shanghai. Beaten in QF by FN in Transnationals. FN won Gold.
2012 Dublin. Failed by two places to qualify for Champions Cup in 2012 and 2013. Monaco (FN) Israel (FS) and Germany (SP) all ahead of us
2012 Lille. Olympiad WMSG Beaten by Monaco for Bronze in 3rd/4th playoff

At the time, myself as npc and the players were delighted with a Silver Medal in Warsaw in 2006. As the EBL President said at the awards presentation. ‘Italy were off the radar at this tournament but Ireland beat the rest.’ Now I feel sick.
Sept. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FS hardly won ‘eventually’ in Monaco 2012. They led throughout and finished with a record score. In the four qualifying sessions their score was +5600 imps approx (58 pairs) over 114 bds. They scored roughly 4400 imps on the hands they defended (66 hands) and about 1200 imps on the hands they declared (48 hands). Wonder why they defend so many more hands than they declare 66/48 and why they score so much better per board on defense than when declaring? There was an amusing (to me) hand where 20/25 West defenders led a low club against a spade contract but two pairs led the Ace of hearts finding partner with the King. One pair was Fisher/Schwartz. The only other pair who found that lead Wlaldow/Elinescu.
Sept. 20, 2015
David Jackson edited this comment Sept. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually Fisher doesn't remove the tray. He is waiting for the tray to come thru and quickly removes the board from the tray as it appears. Giublio still removes the empty tray. Fisher places the board in the club signal position. Giublio centers the board a few seconds later but the signal is clearly visible to Schwartz before that.
Sept. 7, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A problem with voiding Israel's results is that the outcome may be that the original sixth or even 5th place team is moved down the order to say 7th and both Sweden AND Denmark finish above an original qualifier. Are you only going to consider voiding the Israel results if that doesn't happen?
Sept. 5, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wow. That loop makes the effort Schwartz has made to get that board to the left side, in the face of the delay by the opponent in removing the tray, just so clear.
Sept. 4, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course not Tom. Being a control freak is not a punishable offence in Bridge. But if you had perfected a method of conveying UI via your handling of the tray what a waste it would be if you were always sitting EW. Perhaps you might develop a strong urge to control the tray.
Sept. 3, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top