Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sabrina Miles
1 2 3 4 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 26 27 28 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a staunch proponent of on-line bridge, I must admit that I do not fancy this idea.

To me, one of the fundamental draws of the NABC’s is the opportunity to play in larger events (whether such events are against one’s peers or against the best in the game). The opportunity to win gold/red points at home in an NABC event SIMULTANEOUSLY with an on-going NABC does not promote the goal of having a larger field at the NABC, but may detract from it. Candidly, I think in the long run, folks may just stay home. And thus, the slippery slope begins. Those who do spend the time and money to attend a NABC may become disappointed by low attendance turnout and in turn decide to just play at home.

The ACBL should not compete against itself; a house divided against itself will not stand. Yes, please have an on-line event for the purposes of promoting bridge and bringing red/gold points to those at home….but PLEASE refrain from doing it simultaneously with the NABC. If it must be tried, I would propose having those within 200/300 miles of the event be prohibited from participating on-line.

Full disclosure: I have already paid for 12 nights in Toronto (must get there early so as not to be tired) and I really don’t like the idea of not being able to participate in a NABC event on-line. However, please let me know if this will be the ACBL’s position going forward. I’d like to save the expense of a trip to Hawaii in the fall of 2018.
June 14, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One that made me think and changed my perspective on bidding (for the better, I might add) was from Steve Bloom, he said: 1) Game tries are not without cost; (2) Selling out to the opponents at the two-level, when they have found a fit, is losing bridge.
June 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I generally play 3 here as puppet stayman. So with no 4 or 5cM, p will bid 3NT and I will pass. If p bids 3, I will bid 3 to show 4….and then p will either bid 3NT or 4.
June 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This takes stretching to game at IMPs to a new level.
June 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
…or equal vulnerability. It sure becomes less interesting, to me, red vs white.
June 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not sure I would have opened this hand in first seat given the vulnerability. But since I did, in for an inch, in for a mile.
June 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No.
June 6, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I generally play transfers on over double and 2. Thus, I read the 2 bid as a transfer to . A rebid of the to say oops, let's P know I goofed – or at least lets him think I about what I meant.
June 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why did I pass in first seat? If you missed a pass in the diagram, I vote 3nt.
June 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This scenario came up in a board I played in a sectional this weekend. When my p bid 3nt over opps opening 3 bid I was tempted to transfer him to 4 (I had 5, but only 8 HCP). I didn't transfer because we had not discussed whether a transfer was on. (BTW, 3nt was the winning bid here). Nonetheless, if my hand were bigger, e.g., 13+ when my p overcall opps preempt with game, I am certainly going to explore slam…and although we have no real agreement, we have agreed (subsequent to this weekend) that Front of Card systems are on.
May 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this is a great move! It demonstrates that the ACBL does listen. I must admit that I found the parking situation in Orlando very aggravating. I did like Orlando in November/December. Hopefully an equally attractive location can be found without the ugly drawbacks.
May 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am curious why there was an invitation with 11 HCP, a void, opposite p's opening 1NT (15-17).
May 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was a bit confused about the system; I thought that std american and 2/1 were two separate and distinct systems, no? In both systems, however, a cue of the opponents system shows a limit/limit+ raise of partner's suit.
May 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With all the talk of the NABC's dying out, it seems to me that hotel reservations must be made as soon as ACBL opens them….and alternative arrangements must be made at least 6 months before to secure a decent price…with close proximity (if you are willing to travel a distance to the playing site, there are many choices). I know that I had to settle for my second choice in San Diego, because I am liking Airbnb and my first choice there had already been booked just for the time period covering the nationals….coincidence? I think not (and I booked in February).

I second Ethan's suggestion to try Airbnb. But please note, the prices for the places close to the Convention Centre have more than doubled from the time that I booked my condo there (late November). If you don't book extremely early, it seems your choice is dollars or proximity…and only you can decide which is better. Me, because both are important, I decide to book extremely early.
May 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Occasional remarks about the other table (closed/open of the same team), ok; but I've chosen this table. Sometimes I choose a table because there is no voice commentary…or very little written commentary at the table(s)/pair that I wish to watch. To see much written commentary about the table that I would have preferred to watch I find VERY frustrating and a bit annoying. If there had been sufficient commentary in that room, I would not be in the one I am watching. You make me choose and then torture me with news about the one I preferred to watch.
May 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In contract construction, the often used rule holds that specific and exact terms are given greater weight than general contract language. When the COC says that with 19-24 teams entered there would be carryover, one might expect that with 20 teams entered there would be carryover.

Granted the COC was not well drafted, but it was specific enough to glean the District's intent.
May 1, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Tim….that's what happens when one does not read the entire COC. There is/should have been carryover when there are over 19 teams. But if one reads only a portion, it is easy to come to the wrong conclusion. Apparently, many did not bother reading the entire COC
April 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Tim, apparently the TDs don't read it, unfortunately.
April 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just because the district decides on the COC does not guarantee that the Directors follow those COC. For flight B in D25, they didn't. Carry over was done away with because the COC was not followed.
April 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As someone who LOVES BBO, I would say that the robots could use some fine tuning. What I'd like to see is an option for players to check off what additional/fewer conventions that the bots could/would not play; e.g., check puppet and the bots play it/uncheck drury and that bot does not play it.

What I do love about the bots is that when one highlights its bids, the explanation consistently describes the hand it holds…..if only my p's bid consistently described the agreements we have when s/he bid! Additionally, the bots descriptions have proven a useful teaching tool for learning standard bids.

I find the biggest shortcoming of the bots is the lack of defensive signaling. Yes the bots overbid when their partner give untruthful information – or try to mastermind the hand! In all, the bot lasts for, at most, 12 boards….and never talks back, never criticizes, and always takes you back when you really screw up.
April 26, 2017
1 2 3 4 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... 26 27 28 29
.

Bottom Home Top