Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Marshall Lewis
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why the “but” ? :)
Sept. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With the quarter-finals now concluded, Burn's First Precept of Captaincy has been decisively corroborated.
Sept. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes it was not intended as restrictive modification, but rather more along the lines of: “Balanced hands with double-digit loser quotients, in this case a full eleven ….” Once again my fatal foible – pathological commitment to concise prose – results in a regrettable infelicity.
Sept. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(1) Balanced 11 losers is a Pass.
(2) Any perceived tactical motivation for bidding is more than counterbalanced by the great likelihood that partner will do the wrong thing later in the auction.
(3) Pass here is an investment in the future, because acting with this garbage informs partner that we are content to saddle him with impossible guesses in auctions of this sort. He needs to be able to count on us for something in the way of a sensible reason to bid, because unless our raises fit that description they do not rate to make any serious contribution to effective competitive bidding by our partnership.
(4) More generally, in situations such as this we rate to benefit more from slowing the auction down than from escalating it.
(5) One reason for (4) is that it is generally unwise when very weak to squeal on our degree of fit, which can so easily assist the opponents to gauge the extent of their own fit. For example, we might easily push them into a game they wouldn't be especially likely to bid when Advancer has 3-4 cards in our suit. This is especially dangerous here because we have four spades, so their fit is probably in a minor. If it were in spades they would be somewhat less likely to stop short of game, but they generally need rather more impetus to contract for an 11-trick game – unless of course we provide them with a wire on the board. Picture for example: AQxx x Kxxx Axxx, facing Kx xxx Axxxxx xx. That is a huge-% slam with only half the deck, but the opponents might struggle even to reach game if we do not assist them. Better illustrations of my point can no doubt be adduced, but my post for once is starting to reach excessive proportions.
Sept. 23
Marshall Lewis edited this comment Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, some people sometimes pass. Next question? :):)
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So does Rule 1 apply even when England is fielding John Holland?
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ironically, I was surprised to see so many votes for bidding.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you suppose Dutch captains follow the same rules?
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The motto is doubtless “David and Conquer”
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The above comments seem both premature and hyperbolic, given that:
(1) The matches are only half over
(2) Take the BB, for example – in two of the three alleged “wrong-pick upsets”, the margins at the halfway point are 10 and 16 IMPs, which are hardly robust cushions with 48 boards yet to play.
(3) In the d'Orsi, the three relevant margins are 22, 23 & 28. Not entirely trivial of course, and one would generally prefer to have the numeral preceded by a plus sign than a minus, but still hardly of rout proportions.
(4) In the Mixed event the half-time scores bear out my point most strongly of all – in two out of the three matches where the supposed “underdogs” are currently leading, one of the margins is a single IMP and the other is a stupendous 3 IMPs.
Sept. 23
Marshall Lewis edited this comment Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
might depend on 2C openers
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A lot depends on who the opponents are and what I know about them. 5D is difficult to criticize, but once in a while it could go 5H on our left and 6H by dummy (e.g. maybe with x QTxxx xxxx Axx). Might be better off bidding a lower number of diamonds giving them room to subside in 4H. Then take the save, which will drive many opponents crazy – admit it, this works for your opponents all the time, and it irritates the hell out of you that they land on their feet after flouting the principle of “bid as high as you dare at the first opportunity”.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(a) 3S also did not carry the message that S would bid again over a rejection of 3N.
(b) S doesn't have to “devine (sic) the degree of North's club support”, because North is the one who introduced clubs into the auction.
Sept. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And indeed they will need quite a solid grounding in logic to deal with such triple negatives.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
or more then enough
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We get it, you bid 4C
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are various ways to look at the feedback from a BW poll. There are sensible options to taking unsifted raw quantitative results at face value.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My answer to the poll does not appear on the ballot, and is uncharacteristically laconic: Caveat Emptor
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An additional point in favor of 5C is that it could so easily be important for partner to be declarer.
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The default form-of-scoring for most of us is IMPs, so reading these comments and seeing no reflection of an awareness that this is MPs, I am wondering if some people glazed on past that aspect of the conditions.
Sept. 20
.

Bottom Home Top