Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Christopher Monsour
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OKB was awesome even before it went commercial. It dates back to before many people outside of academia and some government agencies even used the internet. It was a marvel how well it worked even when the internet was so slow. That may have been why the interface was so good…Necessity is a mother of efficient invention…
Jan. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Let me second Bob H's comments. I only had the opportunity to play in one BPT event, but it was a lot of fun, and thanks to Larry for the effort.
Jan. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Better question: Are the bots programmed to use the UI that they have?
Jan. 19, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would agree that robot bridge isn't bridge. It's more like a very inexpensive-to-run par contest where almost all the problems are declarer-play problems.
Jan. 18, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You mean all ouver it. :)
Jan. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aviv, are you volunteering to go through the individual responses and to summarize the percentages when someone posts a poll that way? No? I thought not.
Jan. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, I'd still be less exposed to that than people for whom neither minor is natural. Half a loaf….
Jan. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd be especially wary of item (a) since it might be hard to execute without giving tax advice (with the consequent potential liability for whoever gave the advice).
Jan. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would take this as invitational and not passable if it came up undiscussed, requiring a 3 bid on a minimum, and asking me to do something intelligent otherwise…

However, with discussion, I think there is a lot to be said for Ogust. Weak jump overcalls tend to be potentially a lot flakier and wider-ranging than weak two openings, so range and suit quality are more useful things to ask about than after a weak two opening (where I think feature ask is clearly preferable to Ogust unless you open weak twos very aggressively).
Jan. 14, 2016
Christopher Monsour edited this comment Jan. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ed, I didn't say it was. The point is, since you can easily narrow the range for 1 in 3rd and 4th seat, it would be foolish not to do so. (Of course, this comment only applies for strong club systems that employ light openings in the first two seats. It wouldn't apply to Blue Team, for example.)
Jan. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think it's not that strange that one may have concluded one wouldn't be bidding, but that doesn't mean one might not be interested in doubling the final contract. Thus, it does convey UI not to ask.
Jan. 14, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One isn't often burned by them, but they seem pointless. After all, if partner would have opened most 10 counts, my 1, 1, 1, 1NT, and 2 opening bids all have much higher minimums (lead-directs apart, but those are rare and easily handled by pass a 1NT response or rebidding 2M over Drury) than in the first two seats, so they may as well have higher maximums, too. One of the biggest difficulties of big club systems is the massive set of possible ranges opener has to express after 1-1. It's awfully nice to have his range narrower. It's also nice not to have the range for a non-1 passed hand response to 1 to be as narrow as 8-9.

But then my goal in playing Precision is not to open 1 as often as possible, but merely to keep other openings from having too wide a range. (Well, OK, I'd rather open 1 than 2NT regardless…)
Jan. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I gave an obvious example, but there is a more insidious one. Over the alerted 1 response, the next player passes without asking, and his side ends up defending. His partner knows that he did not have a takeout double of clubs and hearts NOR of clubs and spades and did not have an overcall in hearts or in spades…considerably more information than he is entitled to.
Jan. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course not asking can be UI. Playing against unfamiliar opponents, suppose LHO opens 1 and RHO responds 1, which is alerted. You have a good enough spade suit that you'd like to name it even if 1 showed spades, but a 1 bid by you would not be natural if 1 showed spades. So you bid 1 without inquiring as to the meaning of 1. You have just created a massive amount of UI for partner. Try playing a system that is unfamiliar to the field and you will see your opponents doing things like this.
Jan. 13, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You can already redouble your partner's bids (just not all of them).
Jan. 12, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I basically agree with Jay, but when their suit is spades, I would prefer doubles played a la Woolsey (see http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/the-guiding-light/).
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Asking and then passing, as long as it is done consistently (which could mean always or it could mean only after obscure auctions), conveys no information whatsoever. Assuming opening leader was going to need to ask about the bids before choosing a lead in any event, it doesn't even waste time. On the other hand, *failing to ask* will on certain auctions clearly convey UI that you were not considering an action other than passing. For example, if a double of 3NT would ask for the lead of the first suit shown by dummy, and it isn't clear (because of not-yet-explained calls) which suits dummy has shown, then if you don't ask there is UI that you do not have a lead-directing double for ANY suit–information to which your partner is certainly not entitled.

Please feel free to continue to state the obviously wrong if you must, but do not feel free to snivel at me about what you “hope” I “didn't mean”.
Jan. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I wrote what I wrote. If you disagree, say why. “I hope you don't mean…” is just childish.
Jan. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Quod scripsi, scripsi, Aviv.
Jan. 9, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Quod scripsi, scripsi, Aviv.
Jan. 9, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top