Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christopher Monsour
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 3 is forcing I bid 4, since I might have needed 4 to expose a psych. If 3 is not forcing, the shoe is on the other foot, and I bid 4 because then I really needed a natural 4 to expose a psych.

Of course, it would be nice to have discussed this sort of thing with partner at some point.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If spades break, you can survive most 4-1 diamond breaks…certainly if the 1 is in front of partner and also if partner holds the 9.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I doubt I have the traditional odds needed for 7, but I'm bidding 7 because this is an exceptional case: This feels like it could well be a 5 or 7 hand, depending on whether partner can draw trumps ending in dummy after the likely club lead.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass, but if partner were not a passed hand, I would consider 1NT.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A Terence Reese fan, eh, Art?

Actually, that's not what I'm saying. I really only intend this to apply to cases where the WBF would have some sort of jurisdiction (i.e., cheating in WBF events or the qualifiers for such). And I don't think a third party should have anything to do with it, so obviously there's not a snowball's chance in h*!1 of this happening unless WBF leadership changes. This is just about how does the WBF get leverage to get obvious cheaters to fess up without blowing its shrinking budget on trying the obvious. Somewhat like plea bargains. Also somewhat like the Romans did…commit suicide and your children inherit your property; if we have to sentence you, we will take your property and exile your whole family.

I'm not advocating using those sorts of tactics in a broad range of circumstances (the US relies too much on plea bargains, for example), but in some specific situations, they get the scale of justice unstuck quickly.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And most schools in lower New England take off the entire week of Presidents' Day (they even call it “Presidents' Week”), but most New Englanders are aware enough to realize it's not like that in the rest of the United States.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One could solve the problem of not having leverage for a deal when the penalty for a guilty verdict would obviously be a lifetime ban by allowing suspension of the national organization (be it Monaco, Israel, Germany, or whoever else) as a potential part of the punishment. If you think peer pressure was already happening, that will make it massive. This has clear precedent in college athletics in the US (obligatory semi-irrelevant sports analogy).
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As far as I know, truth is a complete defense to libel and slander charges in the US. I think the phrase Hanan is looking for is “tortious interference”, where truth is not a complete defense. For example, if your ex-spouse tells your business associates about your personal moral failings, that may well be tortious interference if the statement is true but not relevant to the business. The interference needs to be with a (potential or actual) business relationship. There is also a tort called “alienation of affection”, but unless Boye was trying to seduce F's or S's wife, I don't think that will be in play. I don't think a tortious interference claim would succeed either (since the statements ARE relevant to the business), but I'm not a lawyer.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
He's so sincere that when he couldn't find the killer on the outside, he broke into prison. :)
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wonder if this is a case where a tank can be advantageous (by happenstance, not intent) to one's own side without any chance of resulting in an adjustment. This hand is a legitimate close call…At the table I would likely produce 7 (or 6) pretty slowly. And who wants to sacrifice against a hesitantly bid grand? But of course, the opponents can't claim the hesitation was misleading, since 7 really is far from cold. (And I'd rather they pass anyway, since 7 is odds-on, even though far from cold.)
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming strong opponents at the other table, who can do the same mental calculations, 7. 7 is far from a lock, but it looks like close to 65%, and we only need a touch above 55% (not the touch above 57% we'd need if this were a major suit). I say “a touch above” because you need to allow for contracts at the other table other than 6…but I wouldn't allow much for it because it seems crazy not to open 6 or 7. Most of the sources of the 13th trick are things you can't find out about during the auction, so you may as well bid the final contract straightaway before they uncover their spade fit and sacrifice at these colors.

For what it's worth, I'd say that if there is more than a 20% chance that the contract at the other table will be something like 6X, you probably want to open only 6. This is a close call between 6 and 7. I just don't see the chances of a sac at the other table being quite that high, but if the opponents at the other table are likely to let my teammates get into the auction, then 6 is probably better.
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, Gary, in the first half of December Christmas travel costs have not yet kicked in. Between travel for Thanksgiving and travel for Christmas, most people need a break in between to set up decorations, buy presents, keep things moving at the office, etc. I don't think costs go up again until schools start letting out for Christmas break, which is usually not much more than a week before Christmas. In fact, I've heard it said that the first half of December is a great time to go to places like Disney World without the crowds…
Oct. 12, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why isn't starting the Friday a week after Thanksgiving on the list?
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is, and in one case we have something that is a rule in 100% of bridge games, happens far too often with intent, and not much is done (until recently); the other is a rule in 0.000001% of bridge games, happens with intent even then just about never, but we'll waste resources on it because IOC…

Seriously
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You know what…there's another problem with starting a team event the first day of nationals…It's hard for pairs to find teammates.
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The solution surely is to start with the Swiss…the event that does not require careful seeding the way the Reisinger does.
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The side question is easy. Pass is not forcing. The bidding decision is tough. It's just about a coin flip between 6 and pass, from my perspective.
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You know, after you tell us North showed 6-5, the “denied 3 hearts” part is a bit redundant… This isn't rec.games.bridge, you know. :)
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Assuming that 3 showed 5=6 for this partnership, I assume I already showed my strength through my choice of direct 3 rather than 2 followed by 3. So pass.
Oct. 11, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I brought up the drug theme because of the inordinate amount of attention paid to that as opposed to, you know, card-cheating. This thread, and particularly Wayne's latest post, is really illustrating my point.
Oct. 11, 2015
.

Bottom Home Top