Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Michael Kamil
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To David and all the other folks interested in knowing who's dirty, ask around. It's not exactly top secret.
Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, I guess “too big to fail” here also.
Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For the second time in a week I'll say that I think anyone should be able to offer an opinion on anything. I think people get far too easily offended by opinions. Perhaps we'd be better off if we were left to use our judgment in deciding the worthiness of certain comments. I don't need BW to do that job for me.

I guess when it comes down to it there's no freedom of speech in these here parts.
Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is notable that Gabby was just suspended on this forum for telling it like it is. No wonder Lance Armstrong won so many Tours de France. If this is the bridge world you want this is the bridge world you'll get.
Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why not simply suggest that Bridgewinners make these threads closed forums for those who happily agree with each other or disagree pleasantly? Or perhaps the site should limit dissenting or negative views to say 12 or 8 or 3 posts. This will solve the “problem” of having those incredibly difficult folks like Gabby besmirching these supposedly open discussions. In my humble opinion, Bridgewinners and those who look at these threads would be losing out. At least everyone would be comfortable.

Let me ask this question…would anyone be annoyed if Gabrielle had posted 22 wonderful sentiments about the ACBL and the tournament in Chicago? What if they were “personal” views?

Timo…I know I'm being snide here, but it ticks me off that Gabby's being told to pipe down. I'd suggest Jonathan gets the point. At the very least he seems to believe the forum is truly “open”.
Aug. 14, 2015
Michael Kamil edited this comment Aug. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course you're entitled to your opinion. My point was simply that it's unjust to attribute quoted material to someone when they made no such statement.
Aug. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would guess most would find blatant misquoting as “offensive”, no?
Aug. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Most amazing about this thread is that people find someone's opinion “offensive”. Never in my life have I felt this way. I suppose it's more comfortable if everyone views things the same way, but it sure seems unevolved.
Aug. 14, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry - don't see why this is an “ethical” dilemma. My partner is obviously doing something, ummm, outside the box, but one can't know what it is. Did he forget that we were playing control responses? Did he forget transfers? Did he only look at his hand after the first few bids? In any case, I don't see what's indicated by the tempo break…the auction itself is incongruous. I think this hand can bid whatever it wants.

On the other hand, partner might have been under some constraints, having heard my alerts or explanations, but that's not what we're looking at here.
June 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually I'm quite in agreement with Kevin R. on this one. In my experience it's a good tactic to enter 2C auctions especially when one of the players is inexperienced with such situations. The truth is that these unfamiliar auctions are difficult for all of us since the 2C bidder has not named the nature of his strong opening and has now lost a level of bidding. That's why partner must give tons of leeway.

I have heard some discussion that Geoff's bid was not best, but I admire it for the reasons mentioned above. I'd be inclined to lay the “blame” (if there is any) on the other side of the table. I thought at the time that once Eric made the opponents guess at 5 level, he should have let it go. Obviously he could have been right, but I think he was giving something of a fielder's choice.

Incidentally, I hope nobody minds my critique here…it's really intended for discussion of the type of situation this hand represents. I mean one pair is certainly one of the best in the world and the other is on the way to the Bermuda Bowl, so….

:)
June 8, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also, in case anyone didn't notice…playing against folks who can analyze and play as well as Kevin and Justin is no easy task! Nice write-up Kevin…thanks.
Feb. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, all good on that hand… Perhaps it would have been even better if I'd taken my nine tricks in 3NT on the last board of the match (almost snatching defeat from the jaws of victory). :)
Feb. 20, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Regarding teammates, I don't get Geoff's viewpoint. I would consider it such an honor to play in the event, I couldn't possibly care who my teammates were. Sheesh, I'd simply be thrilled (and flattered) to have been asked to participate.
June 28, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, Now I am really ticked. Why is Marty lucky enough to get Amy Adams in this scenario? (I'd probably get Betty White)
June 26, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well congrats to the Nickell team - they played great as did the unfortunate Diamond squad. Personally I think Nickell was lucky to squeak through their quarterfinal match. Had one or two swings gone against them it would have been a different story. (yes, then they'd have only beaten us by 150 imps)
May 19, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Old fashioned bidding would have won the day on this hand for sure. :)
May 9, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought you all might be interested to hear my views on the disaster. I tried to divorce myself from knowledge of the hand itself and assumed I was seeing this for the first time. I feel certain that I would make at least one higher move with the North hand (if not leap to slam). It's just too much pressure to put on partner to “pass and pull” to 4H and hope partner reads this as a slam try. Barring this firm agreement, 4H could be read - as many have suggested - as a good doubleton heart and no other appropriate call. Certainly if South weren't looking at the heart AK this would be a stronger possibility. It's harder to find hands for North that fit this mold here, but perhaps xx QJ KQJxxx KQx?

What's interesting is that I was North and “knew” I was mishandling this. My thoughts at the time were, “I don't know what to bid over 3S…ahhh….I have an idea….I'll pass now and see what happens.” Somewhere in the back of my mind I felt that if partner bid 3N, my 4H bid would now definitely sound like a slam try. I think what happened to me (and my compatriot at the other table) was that after partner's double, we both failed to see that NOW 4H was ambiguous.

There's a lesson in all of this. One needs to keep a fluid train of thought. I suspect we both got trapped a bit by the unusual nature of the auction…after all, how often do the opponents enter your 2/1 auctions and bid just the right amount of their suit to cause so much trouble? Credit my teammates at one table and Levin-Weinstein at ours for not overdoing it with their 11 card spade fit. Clearly they would have pushed us to at least a small slam if they bid more.

Oh…and one more lesson…best not to have to play these matches against world class players!!

:)

May 5, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yuan…doesn't your construction of Kx Kxxx Kxxx Kxx opposite Axx Axxx xx Axxx make for a 30% game or so? I'd rather play a partial. In fact, the reason for this is that the King hand evaluates to 11.9 and the Ace hand evaluates to 13.4 using the Kaplan-Rubens evaluator. I guess there's a reason you need 26 for game! (or at least you used to) :)
March 7, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, this hand bid 5C and partner's hand was: Ax xxx AKxx AKxx. Opener passed 5C and slam was missed. The question was whether 5C denied a singleton heart or not. Could the 5C bidder hold, say….KQx xx QJ QJxxxx? Was 4H mandatory on the actual hand - and what would 4N have been instead of 5C?
Feb. 27, 2014
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ah - I see Kit…that's a good one and you're right. Still, it's often useful for the defender to see if the problem can't be solved by looking at it from declarer's perspective (rather than carding). Also, I might judge my play here on partner's ability and declarer's ability. Many declarers would not see your point here and would erroneously try to run diamonds.

Feb. 20, 2014
.

Bottom Home Top