Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Franck Guerrero
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There also could be :
- a “non farter” section
- a “non bad breath” section
- a “non lol mothballs smelling” section
- a “non coffee drinker section”
- a “add here what you dislike” section
- a “i'd like to play better bridge, but due to the smokers, farters, bad breathers, mothballs smeller, coffee drinkers or people in general, I lose focus, can't take a finesse and always end up below 40%” section

Feb. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
or they all should be burnt at the stake, it would smell hard only once
Feb. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
buy and wear a gas mask
Feb. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
42
Feb. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3
Feb. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
fit + control
Feb. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are you sure part will know that I have a strong 3=3=6=1 after:

1…p…..1…p
2…3…4…p
4
?

4 could still be x45x or x46x cue with void or single.
Feb. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i know that one :-)
for me, X would be penalty and 3 the strongest way to express fit.
4 is fine too btw however if p falsely bid 2 with 3 cards, a bit riskier than 3 imo.
Feb. 17, 2016
Franck Guerrero edited this comment Feb. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nope, this one was an horror story for the opponents.
One of Good Contract Badly Bid :-)
I bid 6 with the companion hand (http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-10850/) and 6 was cold
Feb. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
MR:
I think the proposed hands are the ones that bid 6, 7 is bid by the other hand.
Feb. 4, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
the one who leads had the information for 6 “void in s”
Feb. 3, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
on your side of the screen, 6 has been explained as a void. No information about 7.
Feb. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Rolf

I'm not an international director and far away to be enough a competent player to judge the auction and/or the decision.

FWIW, the committee upheld the decision at unanimity. Maybe they should have asked you to sit at the commitee :-)
Feb. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
FWIW, W justified his double stating that, even if it was a high probability that N/S had a misunderstanding, a lead would be mandatory in case they run to 7NT.

Anyway, again, nothing would have happened if N/S only stated that the auction was undiscussed…
Feb. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Apparently, the director and the committee that judged the appeal disagree.
Feb. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
According to what has been reported by the (international) director:

if W has the correct explanation, he does not double 7.
if W does not double, E does not lead a .
7 is always down on a lead and may go down on or lead.

After polling, a majority of the pollees would lead a without the double.

In short, there has been an infraction from N/S, E/W have been damaged, there is a link between the infraction and the damage.

The problem would have not occurred if N/S had just stated they had never discussed the auction and therefore had no agreement…
Feb. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Zimmermann lost following an adjusted board.

board 18:
http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&linurl=http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/vugraph_linfetch.php?id=43012

7 has been ruled:
7 times out of 10: down 1
3 times out of 10: made

E/W asked for a ruling as on N/E side 6 was explained as void and on S/W as choice of contract.
Feb. 2, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
True. My mistake.
Feb. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
the actual auction is there:
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/lead-problem-920/

and that lead to a ruling…

the lead problem here is to know what would players lead without the X.
Feb. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
deleted wrong place
Feb. 1, 2016
Franck Guerrero edited this comment Feb. 1, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top