Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Cory Perkers
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When directing at the club, a few players leave the table to use the bathroom when they are dummy so I sit down and turn cards. I wasn't sure if I should be a director as well but guess I need to be one while I sit there.
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John

I generally think this is a good idea but there is one problem.

When a claim is made against inexperienced players and they don't 100% agree, they will show something in their hand and say “Don't I get this?” giving away info to the declarer. Now declarer knows how to play the hand.

This “technique” could be used (either on purpose or accidentally) by better players and might make inexperienced ones feel like they were taken advantage of.

I realize this is a matter of education but you probably have a better chance eliminating the word gotten from the English Language.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not fond of “class of player” in Law 16B1b but I don't really care for asking others to determine if there is a logical alternative. I would much rather have a player explain the reasoning for taking a call/action and determine if the the explanation makes sense. There would be a lot of self serving statements but that is for me to sort through and make a decision.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Corrected to Diamonds. Thanks.
Sept. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, auction was incorrect. This one is correct.
July 9
Cory Perkers edited this comment July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Disagreement between two stubborn people in a new partnership.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A few years ago, I had a partner who would sandbag after I opened and LHO doubled. Partner would pass, RHO would bid, two more passes and then partner would raise to 2 of my suit 1H-X-P-2C-P-P-2H. Normally this would show a max pass but partner would do this with up to 8 points. He did this enough times for me to expect it.

When I asked a tournament director if this needed to be alerted, I was told it did not but to explain it fully if anyone asked about it.

I think you should treat the situation with the student the same way. Mark the convention card as best you can and explain it if someone asks. In the situation above, when asked about the 2C bid, say it can be as little as QJxxx and nothing else in the hand.

Some players won't understand and complain. A few might record it (even a couple that say this is just bridge).
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry, posted twice.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is what the recorder system is suppose to flush out. These things are recorded and if too many of them pop up on the same player, the player gets questioned about the bidding.

The system will only work if people want to use it. Based on the comments here (and what people say when I tell them their options after a psych), most players don't care about the system and are willing to accept these things as part of the game.
May 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am not advocating “People just don't do that kind of thing”. I don't think there is a “normal” bridge play that includes playing the trump before the clubs.

David mentions above, if you have a trump and you think it is high, you gotta play it. If you think this (or some other) normal play exists that includes playing the trump, go for it.

If you are saying all the high cards and the last trump are the same and a random one can be played, I don't think that is correct.
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael R: In order to force declarer to make the “Sanity Check” and play the trump first, it needs to be believed that the trump will be higher than an outstanding trump.

If the remaining trump in Declarer's hand is the 4, it wouldn't be logical that after three rounds of trump there would be an outstanding trump lower than the 4. In this case, you can't force the declarer to play the trump

On the other hand, if the trump was the Jack or 10, that would be a different story. Now the sanity check is logical and whatever disaster happens is a possible outcome.

So the question on the current situation: “After 3 rounds of trump, will there be a remaining trump lower than the 7?”

My opinion is that this is possible but not logical so Declarer does not need to play the trump (others may disagree). Since playing the Ace of Diamonds and then the Queen is also an illogical play, Declarer is allowed to start with the clubs and escape with a making contract.

All of this is a mute point if the Guidelines quoted above by Keith W. are correct (Letter C says Declarer does not need to make the Safety Check).
April 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the goal here is to tell the opponents the basic system you are playing, not an entire card with every gadget. It helps if you have different overcall structures for different systems or if the opponents spring something that you aren't prepared for.

My LHO opens one club and it is alerted. My partner looks at a convention card and bids one heart. Before my RHO bids, I have to look at the convention card, remember what one heart means and alert it if necessary. If the opponents stated before starting the round “We play strong/polish club/some relay”, now I am ready for partners overcall and can alert in tempo if need be.

The most complicated of these discussions should take 15 seconds.

Most players (especially at the clubs) probably don't care.
April 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I had a bowling teammate who coached a high school bowling team. The students all had averages of 200 or better.

At one practice the, the automatic scorers broke and none of them knew how to keep score (other than the coach). He yelled at the team and made them learn to keep score.

Isn't technology wonderful?
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
IMHO, the determination of whether North acted correctly or not is based on if North thought they could be playing Meckwell runout.

Opponents are entitled to know your agreements but not what is in your hand since you are allowed to deviate or misbid.

After the auction but before the lead, the following conversation takes place:

North: Are you sure that is our agreement?
South: Yes, remember we discussed playing systems on but decided Meckwell would be better.
North: Oh, now I remember. You are correct.

EW has the correct info and North gave away his hand for no reason (I know, serves North right for forgetting the agreement).

With a chance that Meckwell runout was correct, North did the right thing since it is possible there is no misinformation.

If there is no chance that Meckwell was correct, then something should be said before the lead.
April 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Matthew

If this is the motion that people believe prevents you from playing in these events, I don't see how that would be correct.

The first item says that you will be forced to play in the highest Flight because you won a National Championship. Regional Swiss with A/X and B/C/D, you will be forced to play in A/X even if you qualify for B/C/D.

The second item says that you will be forced to play in the highest Strat because you won a National Championship. Regional Pairs A/X/Y Unl/6000/3000, you will be forced into A regardless of point count.

The third item says that if you enter something that requires you to state your masterpoints to be placed in a bracket, you will be be credited with 10,000 points (or more if you have more). As Kevin says, this will allow your team to play up in bracketed things.

Unless the ACBL considers things like the Blue Ribbon/mini Blue Ribbon one flighted event, I don't see why you can't play in something like the mini Blues.

I would suggest contacting the ACBL directly to ask this question. It is possible your friend and the director are both mistaken.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This sounds like a new version on the old argument of which laws do you want to enforce (like telling someone to put a penalty card back into his/her hand).

There is nothing wrong with what the poster did. It is within the rules. Opinions will vary on whether this should be done based on the event and players involved.

The TD saying the poster is “Technically” correct is a bit curious but may not mean anything.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I tend to agree.

If you do something that is the slightest bit unexpected (like calling the Jack), people take a fraction of a second to react. It is just natural.

If you stop to think for a 10 or 15 seconds to recount the hand, some players wander off mentally and just aren't ready to instaplay when you are ready to continue.
March 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree that this director call is likely to drive away players.

If I rule down one, the declarer will be upset/annoyed/whatever and decide to stop playing at my club. Declarer will encourage others to do the same.

If I rule making four, a month later I will rule against one of the defenders of this hand who as declarer, makes a claim thought to be exactly the same but in my opinion is different in some way. Now this player will be upset because I am playing favorites and stop playing at my club, encouraging others to do the same.

Even worse is when I rule making four and a month later the declarer of this hand makes a similar director call as defender (yes, that does happen). Now I get a lecture about how the current call is different and the declarer isn't good enough to make the right play. This player now stops playing at my club and encourages others to do so.

PLEASE CALL THE QUEEN!!!
March 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you opened hands one or two or both 1NT with some frequency, you should probably announce “14+ to 17”. This is full disclosure, especially if your partner might expect it. I do this with one partner because we have both agreed we open these types of hands 1NT. If you announced “15 to 17” with these hands against me, I would not feel damaged. This is like saying you only open 12 counts but then decide to open AK, A.

Hand three is a little different. If you have some understanding that at least one member of your partnership will open these types of hands, this changes your range. I realize that some players will value this hand as 15 but if it happens regularly, the announced range needs to change. While it isn't a psych, it should be treated the same way: OK if very infrequent and a surprise to partner.
March 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I put the blame for this on your partner.

While I kind of dislike the opponents actions, I really dislike it when dummy acts as a second declarer. There is one and only one declarer on the hand.

During one club game, I lead a card, LHO played a high card that was going to win the trick, partner picked a low card from dummy and RHO insta-played. I quietly muttered play when I actually wanted to play a different card to unblock the suit. Still a bit dazed, I just let play continue. After the session, I told partner to wait for me to call a card in the future.

I would suggest you have a polite chat with partner about this.
Feb. 26
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top