Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Brian Platnick
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 21 22 23 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John Adams,

Danny said, “abstruse” as in recondite or hermetic. Not “Obtuse”

Abstruse is a cute word, obtuse is not. But everyone looks at system regulations for a different angle.
14 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Bridge players in the ACBL should care a lot if their governing body has passed a regulation not permitted by the Laws of the game.”

Richard,

You keep stating this as a fact. I'm sure you have addressed this before, but to make it easy for me, can you briefly explain why this regulation is not permitted by the laws.
Jan. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard,

I have no idea what the ACBL is or isn't allowed to regulate. My views are based on the assumption that the ACBL is not overstepping its authority.
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Chris,

While Danny Sprung did reverse his opinion in this thread on the legality of the 1NT opening, he did not reverse his interpretation of the rules. He just momentarily forgot about the 10 cards in 2 suits rule. Like many of us, he posted too quickly the first time.

So I think Ray’s characterization that “Danny corrected himself” is more accurate.

In general, I agree with the committee and disagree with Caprera about bright-line rules. While bright-line rules can lead to absurdity, it is better than the alternative of endless litigation. When we started playing precision, I opened 1C with something like AKJTxxx AKx xx x. When a good player (who I won’t embarass in public) commented that he thought 1C promised 16, I asked if the bid would be okay if my small singleton were the Jack. In matters of judgment, my “singleton jack rule” is irrelevant, but rules are different. If there is a rule that a strong 1C must contain 16 HCP, then my hand above is not okay but AKJTxxx AKx xx J or KJxxxx KQJ QJ QJ are fine. A bit absurd, but clear.

Caprera is full of Carap. Bright-line rules are good and the rule in question is reasonable clear.
Jan. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Congratulations Dennis, well deserved.

Once minor issue with the article:

“Gracious in victory as in defeat …”

Does Dennis ever lose?
Jan. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sam,

I would never play your system. It seems from your comments here that the key component of “symmetric double relays” is the word symmetric in that both partner’s get 100% of the blame for a bad board. In my system, I try to allocate almost all of the blame to JD even if it appears that I’m actually at fault. I suggest you change to “symmetric double relay with asymmetric post-mortem.”

As far as the auction in the OP, I generally agree with Shuster: “I want to give North 200%, but South should follow through on patterning out by bidding 3♠.” While my asymmetry usually ends at 100-0, Shuster evidently prefers double assymetric post-mortems - good luck to his partner.
Jan. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry,

Danny Sprung has a funny story about Special Alerts.
1NT (P) 2D … “Special Alert”

If I remember the story correctly, Danny & Jo played 2D = transfer to Hearts or some hands with minor suit slam interest.

The opponents, who didn't ask, came into the auction and had a disaster. It seems that “special alert” wasn't enough of a warning for the opponents to inquire, they just assumed 2D was GF stayman and argued with the director that they deserved redress.
Dec. 10, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually I like the photo, especially the cup someone placed at the bottom hoping to catch some stray Victory Points.
Dec. 9, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
According to the ACBL website, this is Rose’s 10th NABC victory. 6 of these were in Open events including a Spingold. She also has 8 2nd place finishes (3 of these in the Spingold).
And has won 5 world championships: 3 open, 2 seniors.

When I looked at the list of ACBL HOF members, I didn’t see her name. I am heading to the optometrist soon for new glasses which I assume is the reason for my overlooking Rose’s name (as well as my poor play in San Francisco).

Is there anyone not in the HOF who is eligible with a better record than Rose?
Marty Begen? He’s on the ballot this year. No WBF medals, 10 1st & 10 2nd place finishes in top ACBL events.
Mike Lawrence? I think he refused to be on the ballot (anyone know for sure?)

Congratulations to team Meltzer as well as teams Wilson and Korbel.
Dec. 9, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard,

My point is that the merit for this appeal should not be judged by the number of comments on this thread just like the 1100+ comments on the following thread seem a bit excessive:

https://bridgewinners.com/article/view/selection-problems/?cj=630663#new_1


As to your other point of contention, I say “British” instead of “English” to annoy David Gold.
Dec. 5, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff,

Not sure how you are still getting 11 days for my suggestion, must be “new math”

blues - Fri/Sat/Sun

Reisinger - next Fri/Sat/Sun

Soloway is 7 days: Swiss on Mon/Tue. Round of 32 (or 64 & 32) on Wednesday, 16 on Thursday

concurrent with Reisinger are quarters, semis & finals. 4 losers on Friday can drop into Reisinger on Saturday.
Dec. 5, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jeff,

You don’t count correctly.
Dec. 5, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cameron,

The discussion seems to be about whether the correct ruling is down 1, 2, or more. So if the other team appealed, that would have merit. But the declaring side arguing for 12 tricks is ludicrous.

In general, judging the relevance of an issue based on the number of posts on BW may not be the best standard. If it were, then after collusive cheating, the most important topic in the world of bridge would be the selection process for the British Women’s team.
Dec. 5, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My suggestion, which everyone else hated:

- Start with Blue Ribbon Pairs

- Soloway starts Monday.
— if a very large field (over 120?), 64 teams Q for KO, but first 2 rounds are 1/2 day matches
— if under 120, 32 teams Q - full day matches.

- Reisinger last 3 days with losers of Soloway quarter finals allowed to drop in to day 2.

While drop-ins may not be a popular idea in general, it is very likely that those who have played in day 2 of the Reisinger over the past few years would support this.
Dec. 5, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree with Marty & Mike,

From the writeup in the Daily Bulletin:

“He said that he spoke to several expert players, one of whom he addressed in the reviewer’s presence. All of them stated that defending 6♠, not ruffing a diamond winner would be a horrible play that no one at this level would make.”

Not only is the self serving, it is utterly ridiculous. He claimed! The defenders don’t have to defend as if he didn’t.

Declarer is trying to assert that when stating his line of play, he also gets to state the opponents line of defense. WTF?

Down 2 + an appeal without merit seems like the correct ruling.
Dec. 4, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Richard,

According to Kit, “Dave has what I call an “aces and spaces” hand – control rich but trick poor. He needs trumps and fillers from partner. RKC won't do the job…”

So how about K KQxx KQxx KQxx?

But at the table, I wouldn’t bother thinking about it. Partner bid Blackwood and signed off, which is not an invitation to bid more. I’m shocked that you would suggest otherwise.
Nov. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AK Qxxxx KQx KJx
Nov. 11, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not clear.
Nov. 6, 2019
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“In second seat you hear 1♥ to your right.”

Barry,

Please be more precise. Is 2nd seat where you were sitting when you heard 1H? Is 2nd seat the position from whence the 1H bid originated? If you listen as clearly as you write, is it possible that the 1H bid emanated from LHO, Partner, or even another table? Why weren’t bidding boxes in use?
Nov. 5, 2019
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 21 22 23 24
.

Bottom Home Top