Bridge Winners Profile for David Stevenson
Basic Information
- Member Since
- June 5, 2015
- Last Seen
- 12 hours ago
- Member Type
- Bridge Player
- Country
- United Kingdom
Bridge Information
- ACBL Ranking
- Non Life Master
Sorry, this user has no cards yet.
- Responder’s rebid
- While I realise that clever people will play clever stuff (I do not decry this since I play clever stuff myself but do not play 2/1 regularly) the sort of player who asked me this will be playing a fairly simple vanilla 2/1 system. So my question is ...
- Coffee housing
- L68C says how a claim should be made to which you are referring. But L68A defines when a claim is made so a bad claim (which, frankly, is the norm with claims) is still a claim.
- Coffee housing
- True. I retract my comment and leave others to judge whether you are sane.
- Coffee housing
- When you know that declarer cannot be misled because he has seen all the cards, it is not coffee housing if he thought it was a time to stop and think.
- Coffee housing
- Of course declarer should accept the offer. If you read what I said, non-claimer is out of their mind. It is perfectly sane for claimer to accept the offer.
- Coffee housing
- If they do not play on then dummy is no longer dummy and can participate in any discussion with the director or otherwise. So he has a legitimate interest in whether they play on. Any non-claimer who wants to play on is out of their mind. It usually means there ...
- Coffee housing
- Doing something like this with intent is a breach of L73D2 and may lead to an adjustment under L73E2. Furthermore a PP should be added on top to convince this player not to do it again. The term coffee housing is normally understood to mean vaguely unethical but legal methods ...
- A question of law
- For dummy to ask what the contract is during the play of the hand is not one of his rights so he may not. In most situations the TD tells dummy to behave and that is it. But it could have the effect of reminding declarer what the contract is ...
- Michelle Steiner's bidding problem: 98xx T987xx --- xxx
- A touch of optimism in my 3♦ bid. I now bid 4♥ unless partner bids 3♠ which I raise. There is no guarantee game is playable but it might easily be which is good enough at imps, and I cannot find out what I want to know ...
- Robin Barker's bidding problem: 74 AKQT8542 A42 ---
- I believe it is to play but thinking about it I think it should not be. While I originally said pass because of this if my partner thinks his spades are better than my hearts perhaps I should go on even if 4S is a signoff. So I am changing ...
See all comments
Not following anyone yet