Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Portwood
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Anytime you get below par score our grade drops - which makes it a bit easier to get back up again. It is self-correcting.

The one thing I have noticed is that the change in percentage in results is not linear - it is much harder IMHO to go up from e.g. 65% to 70% in a session than to go up from 50% to 55% in a session. The NGS does not reflect this - the amount you score above your predicted result is prcessed in a linear manner.
Oct. 10, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At my table I passed partner's 2 Club response - however 2 clubs goes off. It was on reviewing the hand in the bar afterwards that I spotted the suitability of the hand for an article - provided the final contract was 2 Spades.

If you want to check - it is hand 22 http://www.stgeorgesbridge.co.uk/Results/Oct19/191009r.htm

I am not sure how the play went at all the tables of course - and maybe the bidding went 1 - 2 - 2. For instance a club might have been led - although the proposed order of play seems reasonable.

(Another pointer that East has the A is that they didn't switch to a diamond at trick two ot three - but that is also irrelevant to the discussion).

I intended this to go into the intermediate forum - but I misposted - oh well.
Oct. 10, 2019
John Portwood edited this comment Oct. 10, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That can cause problems BUT the EBU own article on the NGS myths https://www.ebu.co.uk/documents/miscellaneous/ngs/clark-article.pdf may help.
Oct. 10, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Which version?

NGS - gives current performance for club players

Masterpoints - lifetime achievement or how much money have you spent to attend events.

Gold Masterpoints - awarded in the top competitions and degrade over time - to rate the very best players on their current form.

(As an offsett - I find the NGS stops frivolous psyching etc, which is to the benefit of all players. You don't mess around if you attach a high NGS grade as asign of virility.)
Oct. 9, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because players (especially novices) don't like changing direction at different tables in different rounds - believe me - I've tried it!
Oct. 7, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I've run this through on Jeanie - if I am right (big if) you do best not to arrowswitch table 3. This gets a balance of 72% (compared to a 11 table hesitation which is 81%).

(We usually get 6 or 7 tables so run a share and relay (bye-stand) with one arrowswitch or a straightforward 7 table Mitchell but play only 6 rounds with one arrowswitched.), but I agree that 18 boards is enough for a novices and a hesitation is much more easy for them to use.
Oct. 7, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I suppose it depends where the office is. I have the computer about 6 feet from where I sit (I usually have the round monitor options shown so I can spot slow tables and know when to call the round - usually when two tables are still in play).

I don't like using the suspicious scores feature - the problem being that I will get extraneous information about the hands. Which means that my partner is unlikely to be able to play the board. Since I am usually playing with a pick-up partner when directing, I believe it more encouraging for them to enjoy playing the whole event. (Sometimes of course the suspicious score turns out to be nothing of the sort). This is one reason why I like the enter-opening-lead option enabled.
Oct. 5, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I find that:

1) Players have readily accepted entering opening leads.
2) It prevents incorrect scoring.
3) Entering the lead hardly takes any time. My only request is that North makes the opening lead (when their turn) before entering contract details into the bridgemates
4) We use duplimating machines so can upload the file to the bridgemate server (through EBUScore) (this also allows me time to review the hands the novices will be playing on Monday)
5) This Monday we have switched to pbn format from dup format so there will be a hand analysis function (I hope) working.

Maybe in the UK we are more accepting and tolerant of change and technology.
Oct. 4, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Last night in a spade trump contract declarer led the KD from KJXXX. Partner (holding the Ace) - ducked assuming declarer was trying to set up the suit. Declarer then led a low diamond and my partner went up with the Ace, aiming to block the suit - but the LOL ruffed.
Oct. 4, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
EBU guidelines quite clearly assume that asking a question can legitimately wake-up opponents - so obviously means it is AI.
Oct. 3, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An ‘extremely serious error unrelated to the infraction’ to be precise (or a gambling action which this clearly wasn;t).

ESEs are often indicated as other breaches of the laws e.g. revokes, LOOTs or e.g. bidding on in a suit that has been doubled for penalty.

IMHO we look at “What would NS have done with the correct information?” rather than ‘NS should have worked out the incorrect information".

Can’t see any reason at all to award a split verdict. There may be a weighted verdict in that NS are more likely to finesse the Q given correct information, but were not certain to do so. Say 75-25 in favour.
Oct. 2, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Personally, I think that there is no need to disclose the traits of your partner - to read law 20

“During the auction and before the final pass any player may request7, at his own turn to call,an explanation of the opponents’ auction. He is entitled to know about calls actually made, about relevant alternative calls available that were not made, and about inferences from the choice of action where these are matters of partnership understanding.”

I would do so if I was going to ‘field’ the misbid, but purely to avoid a possible misexplanation call.
Sept. 27, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whilst the OP definitely made the right call, I don't think he was ‘super ethical’. Ethical certainly - but you can't heap extra praise on someone for merely following the rules of the game.
Sept. 26, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Will USA 1?

Of course they will! Mind you Norway have been very impressive.
Sept. 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You might say that, I couldn't possibly comment. I am cetainly not going to hang, draw and quarter him on this site. If that puts me in the ‘dear hearts and gentle people’ camp then so be it.
Sept. 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is not as easy as that: if the TD decides to award an adjusted score under law 16 D (extraneous information)

© allow completion of the play of the board standing ready to award an adjusted score if he judges that the extraneous information affected the result;
(d) award an adjusted score (for team play see Law 86B).

he has to look at law 86

1. Single Result Obtained
In team play when the Director awards an adjusted score and the result at the other table
between the same contestants is clearly favourable to one side, the Director shall award an
assigned adjusted score .

So if South heard the call AND the TD judges that the EI affected the result then South will not get average plus. His side will lose some imps depending on whether the TD regards the 7 contract as being ‘clearly favourable’ to the other side.

Note that this is NOT a UI situation - law 16B and Law 73 do NOT apply. i.e. South is not constrained about logical alternatives.

If West IS trying it on (I don't know) he could have asked whether South agreed he had UI from the delay in bidding 6 by North.

I do agree with Tom the TD should have been called by West when he heard the comment.

We won't go into PPs (notionally the player who made the comment (if there was one) is liable for a PP) and the West Question might ipso facto deserve a PP.
Sept. 23, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are the carry-forwards?
Sept. 22, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bill, I assume the reason is that it is far simpler to have a straightforward “double of a suit contract is for take out, double of a NT contract is for penalties” as non alertable rather than “double of a NT contract when it is a limit response to a 1-level call, is for takeout” being added onto the definition.

You no doubt remember the ER25 Blue Book rule - players at the highest level got caught in the definition.

ER25 was

16+ points
points + longest two suits >=25
8 ‘clear-cut’ tricks:where ‘clear-cut’ meant certain tricks opposite a void and against the second best trump break.
Sept. 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why not complete the set 36,41,46,51? Would save much time debating.

And lots more people can be world champions - which can't be a bad thing.
Sept. 21, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We do - it's called the Bermuda Bowl.
Sept. 21, 2019
.

Bottom Home Top