Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Thorsten Cmiel
1 2 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I decided West is North and East is south. ;)
Jan. 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AKQ and something in the remaining colors. That is why this last X should be not TO and just is penalty.
Dec. 1, 2016
Thorsten Cmiel edited this comment Dec. 1, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
saw now the click info, was new to me…
Nov. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John you are correct. But in case of an accidentally touched piece you not even have to say “j'adoube”. Even if it is better not to have discussions. The law says if you touch a piece with the idea of moving - liftig it up shows exactly that - you have to move it. In the moment you touch it and decide to change at least in that moment you can “j'adoube”, think and do something else.

John, also a partner does not help if the opponents both do not tell the truth.

Probably it is not so much better as in bridge, but “j'adoube” helps, if nobody has problems in hearing - thanks to Richerds anecdote.
Oct. 25, 2016
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry this was meant as an answer to Patrick.

To my standards I would not have openend this hand in first or second seat. Just 2 honor tricks, 12 HCP and two jacks. To me it is a question of style and partnership agreements. Anyway with the hand you gave I would prefer to play 5.
Oct. 24, 2016
Thorsten Cmiel edited this comment Oct. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In chess it is easier. Intended or not, if you touch a piece you have to “j^adoube” and can change. The rules in bridge give much more space for interpretation - a bit crazy.
Oct. 24, 2016
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am astonished that nearly everybody gives most of the blame to North who has not bid 3 - okay. For me South could have bid 4 or 4 if this is asking for aces and 4NT would be a last exit. So I would split the blame 50/50 fairly.
Oct. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If the description of 2 was agreed as given (wide range) double now should show maximum and partner has to decide. I would aspect a chance for a trick here. No it does not mean anything in clubs but it can be that the opponents run in 4 and then we see what happens. Hopefully partner can double or bid 4.
Oct. 20, 2016
Thorsten Cmiel edited this comment Oct. 20, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you for this. I liked most the chat of your high school friends.
Oct. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Playing in Turkey - lived there for one year - in similar situations the TDs normaly would argue I could have changed to the right play of a heart and strike. So result stands probably the double would be taken away. Unfortunately I cannot give you an example of situations happened to me. But TDs in Turkey try normaly to find practical solutions - that to me is not bad but just different and not always what the law says.

On the other hand we do not exactly know about the meaning of souths 2 and 2 of north. Remember there was no convention card. If both bids are natural a heart attack is most likely.
Oct. 17, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But playing a national quarter final without a convention card at the table has to be mentioned as well. To play a heart from East does not cost anything here for Alfredo (if partner has nothing the declarer will make it anyway. And that to me has to be the main argument to refuse the appeal.
Oct. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yehudit: They played behind screens and everything should have been explained on both sides.

Alfredos double was anyway speculative, but this is how they play. It is for sure that Mustafa would never attack from his single or even Ax here. The normal attack would have been from hearts.

To rule this kind of situations is not easy for TDs here. Also Alfredo could have switched to hearts later and that is what makes the discussion complicated. Was the outcome of this hand the result of wrong information? Taking away the double for 3NT just would have been the alternative.
Oct. 16, 2016
Thorsten Cmiel edited this comment Oct. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for this and the other posts here. I had never the idea that you wanted to insult anybody.
Oct. 16, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have not catched the “Rabbi” thing!?

In fact during that hand was played I was going for a quick drink and came back I was astonished not to say shocked.

Alfredo had a bad day yesterday and they (he and Mustafa) profited from serious mistakes of their opponents in that match. The hand with Kx in Alfredos hand - playing 4 spades - and his opponent played cashed an A of heart and played A from a holding of AQx in the second round sitting behind Alfredo. That was a club level mistake. I think the players were tired. For example Alfredo and his team play with just 4 players since monday.

I have just not understood how they won the second turn in that match. Were there some results corrected later or mistakes in BBO?

Todays match in first and second segment from Alfredo and Mustafa was fantastic for spectators.

I hope we see tomorrow bridge like this.
Oct. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hello John,

I am not against statistic methods and their heavy usage. But I am for a proper use. I simply read (understood) Yehudits article differently about her main message.

We need standards and cristal clear communication from the organisations in any case. Wroclaw was a desaster if you see the accusations in the Spain-US-Case.

Statisticians should be cautious and not every divergence from standard play should be called cheating. If you analyse for example Zias play - he to me is the greatest intuitive player on tour - who sometimes does strange moves for mortals. I have no idea what an analysis of big data (last 30 years) will show. But I am 100% sure he is not cheating.

Example for misusage Versace/Lauria were accused here at BW by someone well known - have not the link, sorry for this - that was an incredible unfounded attack and should not have been done.

The message to me still is: Statisticians should use their methods with care.
Oct. 7, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For me this article was not primarly about statistics but about the unreflected usage of it. Yehudit said: We should step back and see what happened since the beginning of cheating scandals. Thank you for this :)
Oct. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I do not buy the concept of doubeling from the NT opener here. It makes things very difficult for his partner as we see from the starting question (What (the hell) does it mean?). Doubles of the best descripted hand -(range of unknown values is 3HCP)is often trouble making.

If(!) there are explicit agreements of the openers pair here, he can show values and 4 cards in hearts to give partner a chance to compete later, if he has some points and shape.

2H! is more often “Relay” here. If the bid has the meaning of “forced” it means partner will bid even with hearts as major again!?
Oct. 6, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Today Germany was declared co winner by FIFA for 1966 championships. The Wembley goal in 1966 was not behind the line - known since centuries. FIFA corrected a historic mistake.

I congratulate all the winners of Wroclaw. But this was a horrible decision for the future of bridge. Hope I am wrong.
Sept. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jack can give the declarer a bit more guess work. It should not matter which card in heart was lead if you lead this color. Trying to give a second round ruff in was the alternative. But has partner still more than one after this bidding? If partner has just one he has nearly for sure a 55 in and and not bid again? Something strange is going on here and I want to cash my heart winner(s) fast.
Feb. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was the other 3NT bidder here. Gambling with a nearly sure monster major heart fit of the opponents makes sense to me.
Feb. 25, 2016
1 2 3
.

Bottom Home Top