Join Bridge Winners
All comments by David Carlisle
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 127 128 129 130
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
on the bidding you are favourite to lose two spade tricks at least. You may gain by being in 3. Of course you should be in game though and South should bid it. North might risk it too.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tyros hesitate lots usually for no reason and penalising them would drive them away.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
An interesting adjunct to this concerns the difference between amateurs and professionals. Cheating for financial gain is the very worse form. I have seen three or four amateur pairs collusively cheat in the UK and it was almost comical. Pros should get no second chance in my view although they seem to in cricket and snooker.
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Quite right first do no harm.
Dec. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Obviously the heart is in the wrong place.
Dec. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
this was used in the op not by Mike.
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Excellent and cogent reasoning, but maybe I am still missing something. I have no issue with director call or the appeal. I would not have asked for a ruling but that's my choice. Calling the diamond lead unethical is simply not on, indeed it might even be actionable. Why did the appeal committee not address this or did they agree?
Dec. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 is much more of a waiting bid here–not setting the suit. It saves space and kicks the can down the road.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Did the appellants actually accuse an opp of being unethical? If they did it is disgraceful. The appeals committee should have had the guts to deal with that.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have to say if I had been involved in getting to 7nt I would not ask for a ruling mainly because it serves me right and also which pro would want the publicity?
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Completely agree with the comment about style. I like decent weak two bids with a multi for weaker hands like this.
Dec. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Earlier some stated this was not allowed–i base the split on the poll.
Dec. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a way it is a shame this was not given as a lead problem. What worries me is the second poll–do you keep polling till you get the result you want? Why d the rules not allow for a split score?
Dec. 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I offer one hand from money bridge—you hold KQJxxx KQJxx x x and 2 is opened on your right. At green you try 2 next hand 3. 5 from partner. 7 from opener makes 7 a no brainer. Back to opener who bids 7nt and you get to lead. There were no hesitations. My point is that if partner a world class player has an ace which major is it? This was much discussed but in my view if she held the A then pass is correct because a spade is expected. To relate it to the hand in question here what would a double imply here? Well you would know on your lead that partner an ace–leaving you to ask which wheel has come off. There is in my view a standout candidate–the 7nt bid–therefore a diamond is called for. No double in tempo guess what to lead.
Dec. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The lead might only matter when partner has the A–if he has an alternative ace it might make anyway. Without hesitation a diamond seems likely because they may have had an accident and losing to the qd may not matter. Personally I let the result stand but in light of it seems some kind of split decision is warranted.
Dec. 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
61H seems indicated
Dec. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Me too or some hind of vaguely comical criminal activity which I do not think is covered by bridge rules.
Dec. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
must have been under an assumed name.
Dec. 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That type of behaviour is inexcusable and personally if I was directing I would halt play in the room and make it clear that this is the case and suggest she publically makes an apology or leaves.
Nov. 30
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
f course they do–general bridge knowledge takes over-dbl money new suit forcing. Not quite the same as having agreement. Pragmatism takes over.
Nov. 30
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 127 128 129 130
.

Bottom Home Top