Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jan Martel
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 62 63 64 65
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Vugraph operators are sort of kibitzers, plus they get input from 100s of online kibitzers. A few years ago I asked the DIC what we should do when there was an erroneous claim. I was told that in almost all situations, we should just enter the claim and then tell the director after the session.
The only exception I was given is the one posed here - if one side claims a trick that the other side has already taken, the Vugraph operator can tell the table that the claim is impossible.
April 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The thing that has most interested me about this whole discussion has been that only David B and I seem to care about bidding after auctions like 1-P-1. No one has even asked for the meaning of the 1 bid, let alone suggested what bids over it should be.
The other thing that has interested me is that everyone is responding on the assumption that this is a memorized defense and therefore simplicity is paramount. That's true when you're developing a defense to MOSCITO for WBF events, and although my defense there does include discussion of continuations and of bids after (1X)-P/DBL-(P/1X+1), it's as simple and easy to remember as I can make it. But a written defense (which ACBL recommended defenses are) is one that can be referred to at the table, so accuracy, clarity and completeness become much more important.
Obviously, David and I are vastly underpaid for developing written defenses!
April 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Being able to play 1NTx does not mean one doesn't have any escape mechanism! It just means that the escape method chosen does not include pass forcing the 1NT bidder to act.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David's comments point out one thing that I haven't yet seen mentioned in this thread - a good defense includes definitions for subsequent rounds of bidding. We're often laughed at for having an 11 page Multi defense. The description of the bids immediately over 2 takes 8 lines (and could be condensed into about 5). The remaining pages are all about follow ups and possible competitive auctions.
April 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think this http://web2.acbl.org/defensedatabase/mc11.pdf is supposed to be the defense for things like your 3S, although admittedly it isn't very well described.
April 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I mentioned to Chip that I also used to maintain his bidding notes, starting back when they were on a stack of 80 column punch cards! Now he and Marty keep their notes up to date, but Andrea & I help with formatting. And I keep promising myself to read them and start learning what they play so I can play with Chip again.
April 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As Michael points out, it will be easier just to tell people to start with the “favorites” bracket, which will cause the “real” teams to win their Rounds of 64 & 32 matches (and also the Round of 16 for Fleisher & Nickell) and cause the “correct” Bye teams to advance each round. I suppose that would mean everyone starts out with a positive score, instead of starting at zero, but since everyone will have the same positive score that shouldn't matter
April 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I thought I'd have to tell people to choose the lower numbered bye team (and thought to number the bye teams with numbers 1-64, so they were in the right bracket spot (team Bye64 losing to Fleisher, etc). I forgot there was a “favorites” bracket - that means it would be easy for people to get the first 2 rounds completed, which makes this approach much more attractive!
April 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We can't modify it, because it is so intertwined with other BridgeWinners software. I'm going to check whether we could do a 64 team event with 50 byes, since as so many said, that may be the best way to approach it this year.
April 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did think about that, but it means 2 rounds with a bunch of “bye” matches, which would be pretty ugly. Still, it might be a way to go this year :-)
April 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not if their teammates do the same!
March 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course the US is very different from England, but this particular issue is one that’s similar. We often hear an argument that our Juniors in particular should be required to “give back” for all they get (we pay travel expenses for the participants in our Junior Trials as well as all of the expenses of our Junior World Championship teams, which is expensive). Anyone who knows me knows I’m not a big believer in people being forced to do anything, including “give back” whatever that means.
But I do want to share an incident having to do with Juniors, that is perhaps related to “giving back.” At last year’s Junior Trials, on the day when most of the teams had either won or lost and would be going home the next day, one of the players on our USA1 Under-26 team organized a midnight team game. He made sure that the youngest players were invited and were given more experienced partners. They played short matches, so everyone played against a variety of opponents. I was packing things up in the playing rooms while the game was going on; it was obviously a fun event, and gave the younger players a better chance to interact with the more experienced ones than they had during the “serious” part of the Trials. Will that result in more of the young players continuing to play? I don’t know. Would we ever have thought of “forcing” the older player to organize something like this – never. Is it “giving back”? Of course.
In a similar vein, on the rare days when I have time to be in hotel restaurants or bars at NABCs, I see the top players from around the world happy to answer questions from average players; I see that as giving back too. And even in the heat of battle (I see a lot of that when I’m organizing Vugraph), the top players are welcoming to strangers who want to kibitz and to ask occasional questions. I see that as giving back too.
And of course I totally agree with David Gold (there are entirely too many DG’s on this thread!) that playing in a World Championship is not a paid vacation! For example, Chip & I spent about 17 days in Lyon, and never ate at a “real” restaurant. If we had been there on vacation, that would not have been true.
March 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't think that makes any sense for “strong” which is for things like a 1 opening in a strong club - often that isn't close to game in your own hand. I admit that having iii under “strong” doesn't make much sense to me and I wonder if it might be a mistake that was made when iii was added to the definitions.
I think iii is supposed to be there for something like AKQxxxxx, Ax, xx, x - only 13 HCPs, but 1 trick shy of game if spades break reasonably, and 5 control points. That belongs in “very strong” I think, and as an alternative to the other 2 possibilities.
March 26
Jan Martel edited this comment March 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Only every hand that is “strong” by reason of meeting definition iii (although that does seem strange). Surely there are hands with more than 15 HCPs that do not have 5 control points or are not within 1 trick of game.
March 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm not Danny, but it seems to me that depends on whether (in first or second seats) it can have a range of more than 9 HCPs. The only section of the “Disallowed” in the Open Chart that would apply is:
11.*** A non-Forcing 2-level opening bid in first or second seat that has a Range of greater than 9 HCP and could show less than Average Strength.
Sections 2.b & 2.i. make it crystal clear that your opening is Natural.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Soloway starts in 2019
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Although I'm also unhappy that having the College Bowl the second weekend of the Summer NABC makes it more difficult for our World Championship teams to get to China in time to acclimate, it is unfair to say that schedule change was made without input from Juniors. In fact, it was made because Juniors complained that they couldn't play in both the GNT and the College Bowl. The fact that it makes the College Bowl too close in time to the World Championship is a problem with the scheduling of the World Championship.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That is the one area of the new charts that USBF will probably have to revise for the 2018 USBC.
March 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have no idea why it didn't work - it looked right, but it didn't work for me either. I hope now it does for you too. Sorry!
March 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@ Peg: I still remember the year the Mixed “moved” from the Fall NABC (where it was the first event and had nothing opposite it) to the Spring opposite the 3rd day of the Vanderbilt. I hated it, and indeed I have played in the Mixed very few times since then. I facetiously suggested that we could have an auction - all of the male players who were eliminated the second day of the Vanderbilt could come to it and bid on all of the available women players.
March 24
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 62 63 64 65
.

Bottom Home Top