Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christopher Monsour
1 2 3 4 ... 89 90 91 92
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jay, what you describe is not exactly the generally accepted response structure. In the generally accepted response structure, opener also needs to rebid 2 with some hands that would have accepted a limit raise, since responder may have somewhat less than a limit raise for 2. Also, opener may rebid 2M with a full opener if he judges he does not want to be in game opposite a passed-hand, not even one that has a limit raise. As the respondents below note, opener's immediate rebids higher than 2M are game-forcing and mostly slam tries (though some can be choice-of-game).

I don't know that there is a generally-accepted meaning for P-1-2-2-, but I prefer it to be natural, showing a weak hand that does not want to be in game unless there is a double-fit.
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, but it slows the game down even more than it speeds it up if your opponents won't claim against you unless you have followed suit to every trick.
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Lynn, so can you unagree clubs after a sequence like 1-2-3-4? After all, opener could have Jxxx KQJ Jxx AJx opposite responder's AKQxx Axx x KQxx. It seems silly for opener not to be able to raise. If he has to be able to show primary spade support at this third bid (a) it will be difficult for him to ask for keycards and (b) it will be impossible for him to cue spades with clubs agreed. Am I missing somrthing?
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Scott tell me how that works out for you after 1-2-3 when you have your solid suit? Is 4 by you a one-round force? If not, you have no way to initiate cue-bidding by rebidding spades.
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was not at 2016 nationals (2010 Orlando NABC was already pretty poor in my opinion), but I was in Orlando for a business conference a year ago at Disney hotel and it was a truly awful experience. I was on hold for 30 minutes to make a dinner reservation, for which I had to give a credit card number for a no-show fee, and then they charged the no-show fee even though I kept the reservation, and I had to sick my bank on them to make them reverse it. Then two weeks later I read that an alligator from one of their ponds ate a child about the same age as my daughter.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that I'm not sure it's worth trying to make it work with these Disney people.
May 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think it is that hard for the opponents to redouble you even if they aren't cold. After all, they risk an additional 200 to you in return for an additional 520 to them when they are right.
May 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Your premise is incorrect. Compact KOs require teams of precisely four. There are also currently no NABC+ events that are compact KO. You can kill two birds with one stone.
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Restricting to teams of 4 also makes it difficult on players who can't commit far in advance. Today they can often get added to an already-planned 4-bagger once they know they are available for the game. If teams were limited to 4, they would much more likely just stay at home.

Having teams of 6 also makes it much easier for people who have jobs, or children, or spouses to have a certain degree of flexibility.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have zero sympathy for Fantoni/Nunes, and I wrote nothing that would have made a reasonable person think otherwise. I have sympathy for the other people you are proposing to shame.

As for libel, it could be if you said “knowingly played with cheats” (since you can't reasonably demonstrate that their partners knew they were cheats). If you are more careful in your exact wording, it wouldn't be libel in the US (good luck limiting your comments to the US), but it could still constitute tortious interference.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Interesting that they are back to playing Stayman over 1NT openings. There were a few years where they had experimented with alternatives that revealed less about opener's hand.
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They're banned from playing in games anyone really cares about. If you want to publish names of people who play with them in casual games on BBO, your exposure to libel actions probably outweighs any miniscule good you might accomplish.
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What's the point of keeping such a log? Some players won't know who they are. Others may assume that they are playing with somebody else with the surname Fantoni or Nunes. Or frankly, someone may have just been looking for a game and not noticed their pickup partner's name. I mean, it's not like you're going to get the clap or the pox from a card game….
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But your partner's hesitation gives you unauthorized information that he bid 5 to make. (People don't usually need to think hard about a preemptive raise.) If he had bid it as a preemptive raise you wouldn't want to bid 6. So both Pass and 6 are logical alternatives, and partner's hesitation obviously suggests bidding 6, so that is forbidden.
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for being persistent!
April 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even a government run by Trump can give you the facts on recent sea-level rises: http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html .

So, Adam, perhaps no harm if you don't own coastal property.
April 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Seems like at a club game, the director ought to have the option to give average-minus / average-minus to the offenders instead of letting the board be played out. Having patrons who did not make a mistake milling around while the buffoons play out the hand seems like a good way to lose paying customers.
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, the score is to be adjusted if the information from the penalty helps you to a better score than you would likely have scored if there had been no penalty card. Otherwise it is NOT to be adjusted, even if you score better than you would have if had had to treat the penalty card as UI. So it isn't ridiculous. You may dislike the rule, but it isn't self-contradictory.
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are creative solutions. For example, with five-card support and a mixed raise, make a non-club response. With six-card support and a mixed raise, bid 3….
March 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The problem with 1-2 mixed is that it's so easy for them to bid over it….
Feb. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whether strong or weak NT, it helps to know whether opener should bid 3NT on 18-19 over weak 3m. My suggestion over diamonds is to use 3 as a raise strong enough to be in 3NT (or 5) opposite 18-19, and 3 denies that. With clubs, since opener is so often on 3, and since I don't want to give up a two-level call, I prefer to have 3 be good enough to be in 3NT (or 5) opposite 18-19, and to pass with total garbage support.
Feb. 26
1 2 3 4 ... 89 90 91 92
.

Bottom Home Top