Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Caprera
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 71 72 73 74
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Table feel” was the term used in Karen Walker's article. I have no problem with kibitzers at a Tuesday night club game but in the finals of the Bermuda Bowl I don't think the outcome should turn on the surprised expression of the kibitzer sitting behind you.
4 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Tom but 4m are fitting.
20 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The opponents have half the deck, at least one 9+ card fit, one club between them, yet did not bid white v red over a strong club. Did this deal really happen? On planet Earth?
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Make the S2 into the D2, a 5332 hand, and it becomes 2 tricks worse and a horrible overcall IMO. But as given, I would bid 2H at equal as well.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“You certainly should not be using spectators…” I agree with your judgment but the rule you cite is clearly limited to observing “other players.”
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, I want to agree with you, but what definition of unauthorized information? There really isn't. Certainly not in the section of defined terms.
Nov. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Like the time you trumped your partner's ace and then returned the suit.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
76B governs what spectators can do. It places no limitation on players.

So what we are left with is a body of law that says, “You can't do this and this and this…” Doesn't that lead to the presumption that a player can do those things which he is not prohibited from doing?

Mind you, I started by saying that allowing a player to read kibitzers didn't feel good to me. But I am not convinced it is prohibited under the laws. And if it is prohibited, what is the sanction? Note that it does not fit into the definition of UI.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To the contrary, I read A.1.c. to allow information not otherwise prohibited. (B.1. is limited to information from partner.)
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I need the SQ if 3451 or a fourth spade (4441).
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Law 16.D. with regard to “extraneous unauthorized information” limits itself to a player who “accidently” receives such information. The Bulletin article suggested a player could “watch kibitzers…” In that case, there is no accident, although it is unclear to me why the modifier exists in 16.D.

Law 74.D.5. (You can't look but you can see) is limited to your opponents and doesn't prevent looking at kibitzers.

Law 76., entitled “Spectators”, prescribes what spectators may not do, but does not make any reference to “players.”
Nov. 18
David Caprera edited this comment Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am putting East on a four ripper, perhaps xxx, QJxx, xxx, Axx. Matchpoints versus imps is actually relevant IMO.
Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Who plays 3C as GF? Unlucky to be you.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I know it is foolish to expect any question to be answered unanimously, and one can certainly construct deals where partner made a reasonable penalty double but bidding 5D is the winner, however, I would advise anyone who does not pass to go out and buy a copy of “Bridge for Dummies” and read it slowly from start to end.

P.S. I am ok with 4H.
P.P.S. Bridge for Dummies, by Kantar, is actually my “go to book” when asked by someone who wants to learn bridge. It has Kantar's humor and is widely available.
Nov. 16
David Caprera edited this comment Nov. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am a Denver unit member. If I have a problem, I know I can talk to Margaret, our unit president. Margaret can talk to Bonnie, our district board member. Bonnie could talk to our zonal representative. And perhaps it goes to the board. I feel as if my interests have been properly considered.

That isn't to say that the board should lack expertise, just that I don't believe we should lose track of the geographic representation any more than we should disregard an attempt to have zones that are roughly equal in size, contiguous and compact. But there are plenty of computer experts in Austin, Boston and points in between, marketing people in St. Louis, Charlotte and Seattle, and even some good lawyers in Chicago and Denver.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is certainly the right direction but we cannot lose sight of the fact that ours is largely a volunteer organization. In order to solicit and keep those volunteers requires geographic representation. That is why I think a model where the units are in a district, the districts are in a zone, and representatives of the zones serve as the board as Steve and Chris have outlined is the way to go. To do otherwise is to disenfranchise the people at the local level who do much of the work. To borrow from Tip O'Neill, “ all volunteerism is local.” A board made up of the best lawyers from New York, the best computer experts from the Silicon Valley, the best marketing people from Los Angeles and the largest club owner in Florida would be a disaster.
Nov. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My understanding is that some computers teaching themselves bridge are gravitating to transfer openings but I know nothing more than that. I would be interested to learn more about the direction they are heading.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To play bridge with your spouse presents challenges that other partnerships avoid, to be sure. Conversations like “Why didn't you play the ace?”, “Why didn't you throw out the trash?” can and do occur. On the other hand, I believe our partnership is stronger because of it. Make of that as you will.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
According to “Ziprecruiter” the average salary for an oral surgeon is $30,000 more than that of an orthodontist. Michael, I await your “Oral Surgeon Coup”, to be followed by “The Gold Filling”, “The Retainer” and “The Root Canal”, all within a general classification of plays that you can sink your teeth into.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It isn't really an award I am trying to win.
Nov. 13
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 71 72 73 74
.

Bottom Home Top