Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ping Hu
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kyle, this is a case that illustrate online play is different from face to face. I'm the TD in this case and I also had my sympathy for NS players.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I stated, East bid X as DONT but it would be a takeout X for West. As far as NS know, it is a takeout X. East then realized the mistake and decided to play it as TOX. Most players with East hand would pass West 2 bid. East opted to bid 3, this would show a strong hand and forcing in EW agreement. West raised to 4 was natural. East clearly made a mistake with X. And it should be alerted.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kyle,

This is online play. East supposed to alert his X when he made that bid. NS would ask and found out it was one suited hand, although West would be in the dark. As my poll showed most players with North hand would bid 3 after 2, then the outcome could be different. East could still made his 3 bid and west raises to 4. NS might sac at 5. It is not clear what the results could be.

Since East played this hand and did not say anything at the table, NS did not know until the play were over, then complained.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Do you agree X showing one suited hand should be alerted?
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
See my answer to Art. By the way the other table NS played 3 making 5.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What I suggested is given the correct information NS might bid differently. As the poll showed, most players with North hand would bid 3 after 2, that would create different outcome.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No. The bidding at the other table was (4S) X - 4N all pass. So East played 4NT. Quite unusual.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Since the other table was not being complained we did not ask. I don't know exactly what 4NT means in their agreement after 4X. It could be quite possible not for play but W happened to have a hand he wanted to pass.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
NS play Precision. With S open 1 showing 11-15, North XX showing value and no fit seems normal. NS had no special agreement on this. The only doubt I had is if they frequently upgrade their opening bid like this, pass is a clearer choice and they had information not available to opponents.
March 15
Ping Hu edited this comment March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, W doubled and E bid 4N.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is from an online game. East did not see 1 and X as DONT. West could not see the alert and treated it as takeout.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed. NS had 11 card S fit and made 2X when E passed at table.
March 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A neat solution indeed.
March 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
EW seemed not prepared for this sequence as well. In fact West had 1444 with 9 HCP. Here south is 5-5 in both majors. The question is what East should do after partner doubled 2?
March 5
Ping Hu edited this comment March 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
NS seemed not have agreed what to play against Precision 1. South actually had 5-5 major and said he tried to alert it. However neither E nor W saw any alert. Does anyone else recently encountered the problem BBO not showing alert? I had another game where opponent said he alerted but my partner and I did not see anything.

EW agreement after 1 (2) was unclear, but East said double to 2 should be negative.
March 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, I made a mistake in posting. Will correct and repost.
March 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is mentioned in the Memphis BOD journal. It looks ACBL will provide Childcare options.
http://web2.acbl.org/documentLibrary/about/2019MemphisMotions.pdf
Feb. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Russ,

My second question is about the new Masterpoint committee. It supposed to be formed now. Any news? What is going to be its priority?
Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Russ,

Congratulations on your election as ACBL president. I have a couple questions for you.

First is about MP awards for team game. Three years ago ACBL changed the MP award for pair vs team game resulting the top MP awards for pair game 25% higher than team game for same number of tables. As a result there are less interest in team game. Some of my local sectionals do not even have Swiss team any more. This question was raised in BOG meeting a year ago I believe. Does ACBL have any plan to change it?

A deeper problem is how ACBL should award Masterpoint. Experienced players all know that winning pair game needs some luck. Even you are the best player, you don't always control your destiny in pair game. The results also depend on how some worst players did in the game, especially who they played against. So the results from pair game has some inherent randomness. On the other hand, both teams played the same hands in a team game. The team game result is more determined on the skill of the players. Shouldn't a game that result is more determined by skill be awarded more Masterpoint?

At the time pair award was increased over team game, the argument was the total MP awards from pair game is less than team game with same number. This sounds to me like ACBL is just selling Masterpoint by the amount of entry fees.
Feb. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Robert,

I think this is related to what Kurt talked about when vacant space applies and when restricted choice applies.

Once you know the distribution of every suit, there is no vacant space any more. In this case the probability is fixed by initial distribution (unless you have more information about where high card is likely to be). The card play will follow restricted choice.

My methodology is only good at dealing with vacant space problem.
Dec. 21, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top