Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Joe Hertz
1 2 3 4 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 70 71 72 73
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Years ago I made something like what you described but it works automatically with no script needed to run at all to do the job. Trying to remember what I did…

EDIT: Found it. The Automatic Substitution feature.

It's under Tools -> Preferences -> Automatic Substitution

I suppose it might be good to have a script like this run at save/refresh time to deal with the colors and font issues like Kevin suggests above.
June 17
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For about two years I had atrial fibrillation that refused to heel under any dose of Cardizem. My instructions for when the AF kicked in were, “Don't move around too much. Rest, watch tv, or read… basically that level of activity. But ideally, don't be alone. Someone should be around in case it becomes an emergency”.

I thought to myself that said description sure sounded like sitting North/South…and that was the reason why I started to serious about duplicate.

I haven't had an atrial fibrillation episode since December 21, 2010 (a low dose of a beta blocker has stopped it cold). And only once (2008) did it ever happen in a bridge game (while explaining to partner why point steps responses to 2 openings were so very very bad).

I'm reasonably sure it won't happen again, and while I have an emergency dose of Tambocor in a container my keychain just in case (and for a while, told my bridge partners where it was but haven't bothered with that for a long time).

Now that you know where I'm coming from, take this in the spirit I mean it:

If anyone with who has this condition happens to die at Randy's bridge game, I hope their estate's lawyer sees this comment of his.
June 17
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3-ways aren't optimal, but as long as winning both matches is explicitly the way you are guaranteed to win the event, why would there ever be a dumping concern?
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
deleted. misread something.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
forced by the CoC, required by the CoC, tomayto, tomahto.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well when people start using my tablet bid box, they'll HAVE the auction data including timestamps, so you won't need to ask, but in this case everyone has seen the hand, and bid in in real time. So now you know how they would have bid the hand. You can skip that part of the poll.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm reminded of how Dennis Miller, upon landing the Monday Night Football job, told his soon-to-be ex-audience on his HBO show that when he was on MNF, anytime he was was heard to have said “golly” what he really meant was “f*ck”.
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Haha. I've never played vs Bobby.
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are certain opponents who have a habit of calling the director over any perceived tempo variance. so vs said opponents, we have an agreement to take the full 10 (but why not 15 now that you mention it?) seconds at each call.

I don't dare tell you what we call the agreement as it is named for those who inspired us to adopt it.

Now that you make me think of it, it would be a riot if everyone these folks played against did the same thing. Said opps would always wind up getting blamed for the slow play at their table. Worse: Calling the director about tempo variance would make it even slower.

I guess it should be called “Defense vs cries of ‘wolf’”
June 14
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm surprised nobody has taken the “An IMP victory was converted in VP's to a tie” argument to its logical extreme yet, even if just to mock it.

Who would have won under raw score not converted to IMPs? I'm sure someone in the early days of IMP scoring complained that their 2210 vs 710 at the other table was “watered down” by the conversion to IMPs.

Yes, I know the story of the double grand slam swing early in a match that made the scores of the remaining boards moot and ultimately resulted in the creation of the IMP scale..

But if we're going to argue about how the application of a particular VP scale unfairly changed a win to a tie, why stop there? Why do we use IMPs the reference standard? We round 10 point swings into being pushes under IMPs and nobody questions that.

Like I said, it doesn't matter if it was scored in IMPs, VP's, hit-points or quatloos. The issue is that third match mattering at all. But if you *are* going to argue it, I'm going to ask: Where's the line on acceptability as what to round off?
June 14
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you Bears.
Thank you Toros.
June 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Randy, we can't make him play irrationally but a failing line is not necessarily an irrational line.

Say declarer had spotted said correct (only because the clubs behave) line that you're talking about. Then, if claiming at ALL, he would have stated something like, “Nice club lead. I'm left with no other option except to take my ace of diamonds and then 3 rounds of clubs. If the clubs break, then nobody ruffs in, and it's cold”.

You ever saw a claim like that ever? And expect to see one on a grand like this?

No. He wouldn't. Because if said claim fails, then he can't save himself from something worse than down 1. He's left to the mercy of “what can go wrong will”.

So no, he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. The act of drawing trumps first before he realizes the problem would seem to be careless but not irrational.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In my example: there were three sites involved.

One site had a round robin where 4 advanced to a 2 round KO.
One site had a round robin where 2 advanced to a head to head KO.
One site had a 3 team round robin (using VPs which had no bearing as the winning team had beat both opps!) where the winner advanced .

2 weeks later, the three teams had a 3 way at a common location.

In the D22 case, they had to trim the field by >50% in order to ensure MasterPoints would be awarded for making it to the 2nd day.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ray, the premise of your question is wrong. I'm not trying to “maximize my raw IMPs”. It's also not head to head. And in this case, the imps gained may be against a competitor who no longer has a chance at winning and so isn't putting up much of a fight.

The operative point is that the margin of victory in a “whoever wins both matches wins” scenario is irrelevant.

In the Net-VP's (or even a Net-IMP's) scenario, then the net margin of victory is all that matters.

If I'm ahead, and that is all that matters, I play not to lose my lead(s).

If I'm ahead, and there's another input factor which I cannot control that may matter more than the fact I am ahead, then I may have to risk my lead in order to try to make it larger.

And that value judgement is solely dependent on if the state of the other match in a 3-way has any bearing – and what it is is measured by is pointless.

It's not about IMPs, VPs, hitpoints, or quatloos. It's about whether the match between the team that goes 1-1 and the team that goes 0-2 matters at all to the team that goes 2-0. If the 2-0 team thought that's what mattered because that's how it was run before and the CoC didn't change, while the 1-1 somehow knew “better”, then there is a huge problem.
June 10
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If everyone has played it, then you've got a lot of auction data to sample from. This isn't a bug. It's a feature.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a vp situation, you have to consider the state of the match you aren't involved in. Winning isn't necessarily enough. You also don't have to understand it. what matters is if any of the competitors would try to do it. Once they use that data in whatever strategy they employ, it's material, even if isn't what you would consider to be an optimal plan
June 10
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was advised to win both matches by someone who I would have thought knew the CoC better than me. I was flight c at the time and it would be my first ko victory ever (or was it? It was a three way after all)

You minimize swings by trying to anticipate what the opponents would have to do to catch you and taking that into consideration in your own decision making. You allow for a larger, “could be right” factor. Part of this strategy was influenced by not doing that in the previous years' competition and blowing a huge lead as a result of being too conservative.

The point being, said consideration depends on accurately understanding the conditions of contest. And apparently, “this is how we've done it before and the conditions of contest haven't changed since then” isn't a sound basis to act upon.
June 10
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
replace “announcing on bridgewinners” with “publishing it somewhere accessible to interested parties” and I'd say yes.
June 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's easy Ray.

D6 GNT-C 2010.

3 Way final.

We felt we were clearly the strongest team, but as of the dinner break, one of the other two teams (B in this example) wasn't going away all that quietly. We found this frustrating since we felt we were outplaying them by a greater margin than the score indicated. We felt team A was the tougher competition.

At dinner:

We were up 28 on Team A
We were up 9 on Team B
Team A was up ~35 on Team B

The advice I got was to “just win both matches”.

Team B swapped tables which changed the dynamic.

We lost 6 Imps on A in the 3rd quarter and put up something like a 22-0 3rd quarter on B. But the A vs B 3rd quarter was within a couple of imps.

So we're in the lead by a reasonable but not insurmountable margin. We played to minimize swings. Which we did.

Imagine if it turned out that advice was wrong, Let's say VP's were going to get applied and that doing so was a surprise to us but not team A.

Because even though we won, team A beat team B by more than we did. If they had gotten “better” advice than we had and decided to swing for the fences against a team that knew it was out of it while we played to keep the score from changing…shudder.
June 9
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed, in D6 we might have the opposite problem, if there is such an extreme.

I was once on a D6 Regional KO team with David Soukup and Hakan Berk. We got slotted into a bracket higher than we should have been. No worries, though – If we lose, we'll be allowed to continue on in the correct bracket. Problem solved, right?

Except we won by 3 imps…and only because at our teammates' table, one of our opponent's cell phone went off, and at that point in time, the MABC (D6/D7) regionals were assessing that as a 12 imp penalty. Ain't nobody was happy with that outcome.

I never saw it listed as 12 imps at a regional around here after that. but the point is: D6 owned it.

We tried something, consistently applied it, saw ramifications from it that we didn't like and fixed it.

Nobody expects perfection – just the attempt to strive for it. So when the inevitable failure to achieve it happens, accept the consequences of it, and say how you're going to prevent that particular type of failure in the future.

“Doing everything you can” includes this last step. Indeed, the failure to include it proves that the statement itself is not at all accurate.
June 9
Joe Hertz edited this comment June 9
1 2 3 4 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 70 71 72 73
.

Bottom Home Top