Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Danny Sprung
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 68 69 70 71
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
0/3/6/10 seems steep. I'd prefer 0/1/3/5 or so..
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No strong feelings, hence my abstention. How about not allowing new boards with ~ 3 minutes on the clock? You are guaranteed to be late with any start after that.

Also, if there is no penalty for unclear slow play, shouldn't there be a penalty for repeated offenses?
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 seems clear if 3 next shows 4 and longer s.
Oct. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would you pass with the same honors and 3244?
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Kx in s?
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No mights about it. It would definitely speed up the game to a level where more boards could be played.
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Eric:

That might matter more in a win/loss scenario. Winning 2-0 on a VP scale isn't much different from the 3 IMPs from winning by 16 versus 13 for example.
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The easiest way to speed up the game would to eliminate the bonus for overtricks (At IMP's only). Just automatically score all making contracts as +1. This would not apply to doubled contracts. Slams would not receive the overtrick.
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That solution unintentionally rewards the slow players with even more time to be slow…
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously (to me) the + means unlimited..
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would bid 2. Pretty unlikely partner couldn't bid 1, but now wants to bid 2 into what could be a misfit. The real reason to bid 2, is that I expect to make it.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even a match that ends at night creates problems for playoffs. The 2017 schedule has the last board of the night played at 8:20. This is before the players have had dinner. Add another 8 boards at 8.5 minutes per board, the playoff would end close to 10:00.

If you don't think this is a disadvantage for the winning team's chances the next day, I will respectfully disagree.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Who is to determine what a silly question is? How do we know when you embark on a relay auction, whether we might want to make a lead directing double, on, perhaps as little Kx (Or even to psych one with xxx)? Are the relayers then entitled to the information that their opponents didn't ask when playing the hand?
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I guess we can count that as a ‘no’ vote.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We will fix this.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This hand is too pure to pass, notwithstanding the 5332, wrong doubleton.
Sept. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe it shows xx xx AKQJxxx xx. Hoping they get to 3NT.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
One other thought on this subject. Since the USBF allows the use of split scores in rulings, 0.5 IMPs might actually create a tie instead of breaking one.

Perhaps the team we are giving the ‘half’ to should really just get 0.01 IMPs.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Reductio ad Absurdum. This is not giving teams some massive advantage. It is giving teams that did better in the ‘regular season’ an advantage in the playoffs. I'd guess about 1 in 100 matches are ties, then you have to factor in the chance that the teams did not face each other in the RR.
Sept. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with using PP's; and would also use them if the two teams tied in both the RR and the KO stage. It won't matter for 2018, but for 2021 (?), I'd also suggest using the winner of a previous KO match.
Sept. 17
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 68 69 70 71
.

Bottom Home Top