Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Jeroen Wieland
1 2 3 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
it did. that 2 was too strong to overcall directly was not in contention
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
not an established partnership at this moment (we were 5 or 6 years ago). The forcing nature of 2S was never explicitly discussed at that time. If there were ever any implicit agreements about 2S, they have been faded from my memory (but not necessarily from my partner's memory).

All calls were perfectly in tempo.
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I probably should have made it clear that this pair does not play leaping Michaels. How would leaping Michaels work after a multi 2 where their major is unknown?
Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
dbl of 2 is either 13-15 (semi)bal, or too strong for a normal overcall
Feb. 10
Jeroen Wieland edited this comment Feb. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
the answer seems to be irrelevant. If the written defence is part of the opps’ system card, it means that either partner can consult it during the auction. It does not mean that a player is allowed to know whether partner consulted it or not. The only information you get from partner that is allowed to be used is from his/her calls and plays
Feb. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1
Dec. 11, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“For non-English and Welsh people, …”

I think most Welsh people would like to be referred to as “non-English” as well :-)
Nov. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“But certainly Law 12.A.1 covers me very clearly. The violation not being merely making an insufficient bid, but the violation being making an insufficient bid when the player knew darn well that a sufficient bid would show a better hand that the player does not hold.”

12.A.1 does not apply, as the laws prescribe a rectification for the particular type of violation committed: see law 27

if you are talking about 72b1: we are now not talking about rectification, but about procedural penalties.
Nov. 9, 2018
Jeroen Wieland edited this comment Nov. 9, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are your criteria for a redouble after 1C-(X)?
Nov. 7, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
and South receives an educational lecture
Oct. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Superman would be sitting north (pole) playing with Lex Luthor south. Lex brings some kryptonite to the table which is required to enable Superman to play boards 2,4,5,7,10,12,13,15.

WADA doesn't like it, but cannot act (yet) because Kryptonite is not on the list of banned substances.
Oct. 2, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I’m not a mathematician, but I share your “black & white” view of the world. Imho “- 2 + 2” equals zero.
Aug. 30, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hand 1) I think you acted correctly. From the AI, it appears that partner does not have a diamond control.
Hand 2) instead of telling the opps they could call the director, you should have called the director yourself and inform him about partner's wrong explanation. The director will take it from there. Law 20F5b
Aug. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
HandShake
April 28, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
my 4 lead was into declarer's AQ. leading any other suit would have defeated 6
Feb. 22, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Victor Mollo
Feb. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Please note that the current (and past) laws do not recognize this term…”

Let us hope that future versions of the laws will continue to not recognise this term
Feb. 13, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As a player, it is not my job to judge whether some piece of information should or should not have an impact on the action of an opponent. It IS my job to alert if the regulations in force require me to do so.
Feb. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
3 is preemptive in
Jan. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Michael, I wonder if the 4 ‘likes’ you have thus far are for the content of your post or for your statement that you have decided for now to stop (or perhaps for both)? :)“

I can’t speak for the other three, but I can assure that I liked his comments for the content.

Now, where can I find the “dislike” button? A few other comments here would benefit from this… :-)
Dec. 18, 2017
1 2 3 4
.

Bottom Home Top