Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Danny Sprung
1 2 3 4 ... 65 66 67 68
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deja vu. Yesterday I held:

J9xxx
A
xx
QTxxx

At unfavorable, I saw 1 by a world class standard player on my right. True to my previous position, I passed here too.

Sample size of 1; bidding was right, with game cold on a very friendly lie of the cards.
June 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd be very interested to see how a GIB would do in this tournament.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I lost a 3 way in a GNT qualifier by 1/85 of an imp in the days of quotient.
June 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't see any way in which using the score of the last set is going to create distortions in strategy. Using BAM might have some small issue there, but even a close match has to be less than 5% to be an exact tie. Why would you change your strategy for that?

A similar tiebreak is used in national BAM, I believe after most halves comes net score (at some point), but that would never enter into my strategy at that form of the game. I have noted one time when my opponents played a redoubled cuebid down a bunch that I guess we just ‘won’ that tiebreaker. Of course it didn't get to that point.

Jonathan is correct. I misread Peter's suggestion; but I'd still prefer using the last segment score, since, inevitably that will be both teams ‘front 4’. Either method would be ok to eliminate ties though. If we just used that, we wouldn't have to worry about BAM at any point, barring 6 or 8 exact segment ties. At that level we are getting into less likely than 1/number of atoms in the universe.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Dave: It is true the Ten of hearts is a big card on this deal. But, as against that, the singleton diamond opposite the great 5 card suit is a huge negative. Move a couple of rounded suit cards into diamonds, and slam is cold on 3-2 diamonds with lots of other chances. Most bidding systems would treat the East hand as some balanced HCP range, where partner will not know about the 5 card suit. Hard to see how we are supposed to evaluate that particular misfit.
June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the answer is simple. They treated the strong hand as 24 HCP, and the weak hand didn't invite. Seems like 2 poor evaluations to me.
June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would show the same range you did with the big hand. I still don't see what waiting had to do with it. It was just poor hand evaluation, imo.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Bob: Most practitioners of Multi also play a method of finding the Majör that does not involve the weak hand bidding that suit. Whenever the auction starts 2 -p, the strong hand plays all 4 M
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4 always ace asking is not Gerber. I wouldn't play that either.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Third hand highest when partner has obviously underled to try to get a ruff. Spares partner that moment of agony when he isn't sure your Ten is going to win when he has undrled the AKQxx(xxx).

Credit to Norman Kay for making the playing and Edgar Kaplan for writing about it.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why all the hate for Gerber? Some questions I think about when considering a convention:

1. Is it effective when it comes up? I have yet to bid a slam off 2 aces when using Gerber, or a grand off an ace.

2. Does it take up an important bid I need for something else? Not for me. I don't feel the need to play South African Texas, for example. 4 would be idle otherwise.

3. Does it help the opponents? I guess there could be lead inferences from double/non double of Gerber. Pretty rare, however. Maybe they can gain some inferences defending a slam, knowing how many aces declarer holds.

4. Does it occur frequently enough that it won't be forgot? Yes.

5. Does it occur frequently enough that it is useful? I think yes. This is probably the biggest item Gerber haters point to. But, in this day of upgrades, we are frequently bidding 2 balanced hands to slam with 31/32 HCPs. Why get there off 2 aces? Or we have a running suit where we know 7nt will be cold with far fewer than 37 HCP. Why get there off an ace?

6. Are there useful negative inferences for when it does not occur? Not really applicable for Gerber, but quite useful for stuff like Flannery.

My nomination for my least favorite convention is Bergen raises.

Does OK on point one, but horribly on point 2, and a loser on point 3. I guess it gains some on point 6, but a combination of making your GF raise LR or better, and using 1M-3M as mixed seems to have the best of both worlds.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Why wouldn't waiting have produced the same result?
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This situation arises for athletes who earn money in multiple states.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2015/04/13/tax-day-april-15-accountant-pro-athletes/25742385/
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tim: That might be because the better players didn't invite.
June 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
RHO had opened and rebid diamonds en route to 3NT. Hero on lead holding KJ9x of Diamonds, leads the King. Declarer knocked out one of her aces, and she continued with the Jack. In a 3d time, hero leads 9 from 9x into the ten. So, declarer played xx opposite AQTxxx for no losers with KJ9x offside.
June 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1-1; 2-3 tops the list for me
May 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Clearly best for 90 board matches that end midday. I like the idea in general.

My order would be:

1. Winner of previous KO match.
2. Winner of previous RR match.
3. BAM
4. Last set score, followed by previous set, etc.
May 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cases 1 and 2 are trivial. You have to pay attention.

Case 3 is also a no for me.

Even at the highest levels, I don't think one should be able to ‘claim on a squeeze’, unless it is 100% clear cut which suit to play AFTER the squeeze. If the Squeezee holds an ace, and the presumed stopper in the other suit, declarer needs to make it clear that their plan is to play the other suit, unless they see the ace, etc.
May 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There was a 1790 in the US trials today, so kind of easy to figure where 1770 comes from..
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems that one should play the ask is for the JACK when you have already shown a solid suit, as in this auction.
May 4
1 2 3 4 ... 65 66 67 68
.

Bottom Home Top