Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Scott Needham
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After I do all of this self-interrogation, opps have a valid case that I used the UI during MY 30 second huddle.
Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, is there any a priori reason N could not hold a freak like xxxx xxxxxx x xx? or xxxxx xxxxxx x x?
Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
All “actively ethical” and “unethical” commenters: When faced with the BIT and looking at a hand that was always going to take a call, while explicitly acknowledging the Laws effect of the BIT: Do you think that the strategy “take the call and let the director sort it out” has any validity?
Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
JL: Split – though I agree (pre-agree) that continuous range would give E a lot more to think about.
Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's always interesting to me that arguments supporting opinions on these issues show so much variation in reasoning and the possible factual scenarios that drive that reasoning.

For the record: 2 is and or . I was called immediately after the auction, and the BIT had been “pre-established,” everyone agreeing it was substantially longer than 10 seconds. Both E and W are among the most actively ethical players I know. Of the five pollees, four are or have been directors: No hiding the BIT, I'm afraid.
Dec. 11, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
GB: You pays yer money….

KQJx AKQxxx x xx: 15count, 4 (conservative) LTC, looks like a reverse to me no matter what suits are represented (4cd always higher rank), even if the long suit is AKJTxx.
KQJx AKQxx xx xx not so much, but 15count, only 5 LTC.
KJTx AQxxx Kx Ax and Kxxx AKxxx x AKx: 17count, 5.5 LTC: might matter whether partner responded in the x with the second.
Helps to have K-Sish/Leb ways to be able to play in the 6carder at the 3 level.
Nov. 29, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play the jump as invitational, but I don't like it. IMHO, Norman Kay got much the better of Peter Pender in their old TBW debate.
Nov. 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I must say, apart from the fact that the vote loses me $$, that I am surprised by these results. The subject hand is a 6 1/2 loser by conservative LTC, and 13 by K&R and Pavlicek, and that is before partner opens 1. How many respondents allow partner to open a 10 or crappy 11 count?
Nov. 4, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For me, these auctions show unbalanced hands. No alert, but an explanation before the lead.
Oct. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For some real fun, check out “Compressed Bergen.” 1M-2N = 4+ trump and 0+ HCP.
Oct. 10, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Please drop over to “You hold: Axx AJT AKx KQxx”
Sept. 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Please drop over to “You hold: Kxx Kxxx QJxx Ax”
Sept. 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Re: the RFR options, if playing REF I like the 2 call here to mean “I am two-suited and VERY weak, POC.” Similar after 1m-1/1N-2, uncontested.
Sept. 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
GR: Thanks. That was my intuition, especially the part about having a good game, but I haven't trusted my math intuition since those damned Hamiltonians.
Sept. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have taken to a procedure such as the strict liability idea advocated by Perkins, above. It seems to work. I am more interested in which procedure would give the offenders the worst hit to their score, assuming that this is a solvable math problem.

This issue arose when a very good player, who is part of a consistently slow partnership, asked another director to “punish” any late play by them by taking away the board rather than docking mps.
Sept. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The version of Wolffie I learned uses this sequence – 1m-1M//2N-3C//3D-3N as the SI in O's m–THE ONLY STRONG CALL THAT GOES THROUGH 3C.
Aug. 28, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Looks to me like E was afraid 4 over 4 would be taken as an offer.
Aug. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Curious: Why couldn't S be 11-14 count, 4-1-3-5?
Never mind: Answered upthread.
Aug. 24, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment Aug. 24, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
or 4x1….
Aug. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks to all, these perspectives have eased the way. Just FWIW, I had seen one scheme that opens 1D on (4-1)=3=5. Mush.
Aug. 7, 2018
Scott Needham edited this comment Aug. 7, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top