Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Marion Michielsen
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After 3 quarters today

Strul-Caplan 88-99
Monaco-jolly 67-78
Lorenzini-Pelka 113-99
O rourke- burg 112-107
Onstott-swig 102-92
Woolsey-grosset 56-107
Silver-Gipson 119-125

All other matches the highest ranked team has a big lead
July 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you dislike people asking questions you should play a less complicated system.
I very much prefer people asking every bid than the ‘lead directing questions’
July 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It surely depends on wether team 16 gets the worst possible draw from 49-64, or if they are allowed to choose any other team as well.
March 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Another problem for me is that I almost have no WBF points, as women points don't count, and my mixed points count as women points because I am female (as opposed as counting to my open ranking when I would be male, but I guess everyone knows its always the male who is carrying the partnership).
If I had been a man I would have had 10,9 seeding points based on my world title in the mixed in Sanya and another half for some minor results.
Meike would get 11,1 seeding points if only she had been male
Now we got only 8 + 2 ‘adjustment points’.
March 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I only played the Vanderbilt and Spingold once before. Both times we were seeded around 40th (once with manual seeding as the computer had broken down, the other time I had 17,5 SP) . Both times we won the round of 64. Meike, my partner, played once more in the meantime and even made it to the round of 16.
This might be a clue that our team was seeded too low, even though the number of matches is maybe too small to say anything.

Anyhow, the new seeding system has taken away over half of our seeding points, to make sure we are seeded even lower this time. We did get about 2 adjustment points each, to make our new total 10, still far less than the previous 17,5.
As a bonus I guess that any possible future results (we lost in the round of 64 this time btw, although it was really close) don't count for anything for a while, as we will just be eating up our own adjustment points instead of really going up anything.
March 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One thing I wonder is what will happen to some ‘adjustment points’ that some foreign players have gotten.
My guess is that those are not points to keep, e.g. if we gain any seeding points it will just mean we will get less adjustment points next time? So if we get to the round of 16 twice we probably still don't gain anything.

If you make a system were one can both gain and lose seeding points, then one can keep these adjusted seeding points and then take it from there.
March 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I also very much like the idea of earning or losing seeding points depending on who you beat/lost to.
The argument that one shouldn't double penalize a top seeded team for losing against a bad draw is one that I don't buy, apparently (at least one of) these teams were seeded wrongly, so there needs to be an adjustment made.
Also I never hear anyone feel sorry for the teams 60-64 that they have to play one of the absolute best teams, so I am not going to feel sorry for the teams 1-5 that have a bad draw against the supposedly 5 weakest teams.

It just seems to me that the system as it is now is too slow.
March 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Uber worked fine for me. 29$ for 3 people at 10 pm
March 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the meaning of this list and in fact it makes me kind of upset that you use it in a discussion of playing strength of men and women in general.

Agree with Christopher that it's just a very wrong way to compare two sexes.
Feb. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems to me , that if you have the great 10 count that you suggest, that not bidding 4 is very unethical, rather than very ethical.

If partner was thinking that he was too strong to bid only 2, he will surely raise to 4?
But if partner was a tad weak, than you'd rather play 3. So 3 is a ‘safety play’.

That being said, it seems normal to bid 3 on this hand.
Jan. 26, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
People dont uduslly double 3NT except when asking for a specific lead. There is also no obligation to sit when doubled.
Dec. 22, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For me it would be king. Having so few HCP increases the chance that we need 9 top tricks after the lead and these chances are much higher with the king than the queen. And even if you don't have 9 top tricks you still are more likely to have an entry in the king than in the queen.
Dec. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Its very likely they will blow a trick on the opening lead, either because they don't have a good lead, because their natural lead blows a trick, or because they are not supernatural and can't find partners 5card suit.
Dec. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe because they just changed the system , and used to play 2NT as natural before? That is AI.
Dec. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Wouldn't a low heart ask for a diamond, rather than a club?
With the KQ of clubs in dummy it seems more important to signal for the pointed suits. You cant have a signal for 3 suits with only 2 cards.
Dec. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But would the 66 in the minors reply 3 to 3? Not likely.
And considering the change of methods and puppet stayman in 4th I am sure west is allowed to figure out what has happened.
Dec. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Call me naive but I didn't really realise this was a problem and also don't remember thinking myself that my opponents had a wire during one of the last rounds.
But I guess it happens every now and then.

Would it help a good player to see a bad players score? 3NT made on board 9. Is that a good result or a bad result? Maybe they let it make? Or they messed up the declarer play and only took 9? Or took an inferior line, and took 9 whereas the top player would go down?

Of course seeing some scores might help but half of the scores are flat one way or the other or something that you cannot influence yourself. There are also many partscores and you really have to keep notes to see that NS can/might make 2 on board 11 etc. And if you do that, it comes very close to planned cheating, rather than the ‘opportunistic bike thief’.

I therefore think it is a bit too much to disallow keeping scores. Its also not easy to explain why people can keep scores on the first day but not on the second day, and a habit that might be hard to break.

It would be better to have a solution that doesn't depend on people having to change their habits.
Like I suggested higher up it would be better to play the boards in 3 sets, so that there will be less opportunity.
But this creates other problems, because the sets are not equally long when playing 26 boards, and you need to have a good movement of the pairs/boards/seeding.
Dec. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The problem with moving the teams up one place in the knock out, is that the numbers 2 and 3 both won and lost against the same team. So it seems pretty random that the number 2 then wins the title.
Dec. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe it's not always possible to play barometer but a compromise would be to play 4 or 5 rounds and then play a new set of boards.
So you play board 1-10 (some starting with 1, others with 3 etc, and move them as usual) and then 11-18 and then 19-26.
This could depend on when the courtesy breaks are, so that everyone will have played the same boards if people go out.
Dec. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As many have said before east should have played a club regardless.

I don't like the idea of switching to the 6 to tell partner what to do.
My philosophy is to show what you have and let partner figure it out. Instead of you trying to get into partners head and telling him what to lead.
For instance here the 6 of spades could have been from T643 as well, so how is partner supposed to know declarer doesn't have KJ doubleton (and yes, even then it wouldn't hurt to play a club but that wouldn't hurt in any case).
Dec. 15, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top