Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Portwood
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 120 121 122 123
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If partner does something apparantly crass he (or she) usually has a reason. (Although I would have thought that 5 would have shown 5 good diamonds and a minimum, offering 5NT, 6D or even 6NT as possible choices)
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not really - if you make a 2/1 bid which is (I think) game forcing, having previously passed (out of turn), partner knows that you are a bare minimum and, having opened on a relatively weak hand, now knows sufficient to pass.

Equally, if partner responds 1 to your opening bid and you have spade support and a moderate hand then the knowledge that you can't have enough to bid game allows you to keep the auction at a lower level than otherwise.

Of course law 16B and 23C are there to help prevent such things happening, but at least the new laws prevent the person opening out of turn having to guess the final contract.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just easy to say “EBU Level 4 and alerts as per Blue Book” - makes life simple and protects people when entering the shark infested waters of County Swiss pairs events.

(There is an article in the ‘Director Please’ series by Mike Swanson that mentions how clubs can make up their own rules - as long as they are compatable with the laws.)
18 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Within reason of course - so far no cases have gone to National Authority.

I would be loath to not allow a 1 overcall as a comparable call to a 1 opening bid. Although:

1 overcall : 7 - 17 points is not a subset of a
1 opening : 10 - 19 points.

However I think we get by with the ‘similar meaning’ option : shows values and a spade suit.

If it turns out that the opponents are damaged because partner knew the call could not be on minimum values then we can always adjust via 23C.

(The problem will be to explain concisely all the possibilities to the players.)

Call out of turn. (LHO, not having previously called or CHO turn)
Director Called.
Explains
1) LHO can accept, if so no further rectification. If not then call is cancelled and bidding reverts to correct player.
2) Call is UI to CHO but AI to LHO/ RHO. CHO can call what they like at their turn and offender at his correct turn to call can also call what they like BUT if the call isn't a comparable call then CHO will be forced to pass for rest? of the auction.
3) Asks to be called back if non-offenders are not happy with replacement call or if offender needs advice as to whether call they want to make is a comparable one.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There are many hands where making TWO calls would convey the same information - unfortunately you aren't allowed two calls, only one.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unless you are playing HUMs.

A comparable call (double is a possibiluty) is any call that denies opening values. i.e. any hand where you might not have passed had you been dealer.

Examples:

Pass
Single raise : double raise (pre-emptive) : tripple raise (pre-emptive)
1NT (Acol-ish) : 1NT (maximum 10 points balanced - assuming you don't play 1NT as 10-12, in which case your 1NT response should show a maximum of 9)
-ve double - showing 7-10 points and the other two suits.

If you have an agreement to jump on any hand with opening values opposite an opening bid then obviosuly any non-jump.
Sept. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am sure the law says something about there being no recourse if a player takes an action based on their own misunderstanding. (Law 21A)
Sept. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
And that is the problem - an incorrect explanation gives UI and MI - but at least it has to be asked for to be given. It is only in the simplest and most common situations that an announcement is used. An incorrect announcement would do the same - and would be done much more often.

Announcing a call in the later auction would be horrendous as the opponents are entitled to know about relevant calls that were not made and inferences from the call where they are partnership understandings.

Do you really want someone to announce.

“Shows Spade support, usually four or more but exceptionally on three honours, game forcing with mild slam interest but denies a control in Clubs or Diamonds (as he would cue-bid)or a balanced hand with a guard in hearts. Expected point range is 13 to 17, however we upgrade for suit quality and working honours.”
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No one should feel ‘stupid’ through ignorance. Ignorance can be corrected, and I bet no one knows all the Bridge conventions and treatments there are.

3 C Naming of partnership understandings
3 C 1 The system card must give the meaning of all but the most well-known and unambiguous agreements on it rather than just naming them. If the system card does not, a TD may deem there to be misinformation resulting from the failure to give a clear and precise explanation and this may lead to an adjusted score.
3 C 2 If a partnership has an agreement which varies from the traditional meaning, it is not sufficient to describe it on the system card as ‘Modified X’. Particular care must be taken when describing two-suited overcalls. For example, ‘Ghestem’ should never be used as a description since there are many different versions.
3 C 3 Defences to 1NT should be described in full, especially bids that show either a two-suiter or the suit bid.

With the regard to ‘ask and pass’ - the best thing to do is to wait until the end of the auction and then ask for a full explanation - in this case there is no UI by inference(Law 20)

2. After the final pass and throughout the play period, either defender at his own turn to play may request an explanation of the opposing auction. At his turn to play from his hand or from dummy declarer may request an explanation of a defender’s call or card play
understandings. Explanations should be given on a like basis to 1 and by the partner of the player whose action is explained.

3. Under 1 and 2 above a player may ask concerning a single call but Law 16B1 may apply.
Sept. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Its easy to decide a surprising bid is impossible when you have UI telling you that a misunderstanding has occurred. Would you think it was a misbid if partner had alerted and correctly explained? ”

But that is an impossible thing to happen! You cannot theorise what you would do in a situation that can never come up. In other words - there is no chance at all that partner will alert and then bid 3.
Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Right Through The Pack” has a hand (tale of the 7) where South plays in 7XX with a 13 card suit and goes 13 down.
Sept. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Conventional != Natural

4 C 1 The following are considered ‘natural’ for the purposes of alerting and regulation of partnership understandings (see also 3E1):

(a) A bid of a suit which shows that suit (3+ cards) and does not show any other suit; preference bids, completion of transfer bids and raises may be on shorter suits

(b) A bid of no trumps which shows a preparedness to play in no trumps, and which conveys no unusual information about suit holdings; it must not be forcing unless a forcing auction has already been created. Note that certain ostensibly natural no trump bids are permitted to allow a shortage by agreement

© A pass which does not unexpectedly convey values or specify suit holdings.

EBU BB

NB elsewhere in the BB you are forbidden from opening 1 or 1 on fewer than 4.
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2NT opening bids (if balanced) are announced in the EBU.
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
At school is was “A,2,3,4 - Kiss the dealer”
Sept. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is in the EBU - not the ACBL. Conventional overcalls are alerted.
Sept. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No - all my money goes on taxes and essentials of living.
Or to quote someone else who wasn't a neophyte at matchpoints “Only Jesus Saves”.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Of course - Several times a wrong card comes out when you pull your selected call. Usually it is pretty obvious that has happened, you correct it ‘without pause for thought’ - at least that is what happens at the table - and the Director isn't called because it is an obvious mechanical error. (OK Ed, I know he should)
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1NT is usually a very good contract at MPs. Here in EBULand we announce “12-15 could include a singleton” - everyone knows the possible hands, and what could be simpler?

(If we have a clear rebid, we open 1 of a suit; if not then 1NT.)
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Anyone play Minibridge?
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was told in my youth to consider two situations:

1) Player has stiff King: 100% certain he will play it.
2) Player has KQ doubleton - SOME of the time he will play the Queen. i.e. probability playing King < 100%

Therefore if the King is played, it is more likely to be option 1.
Sept. 11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 120 121 122 123
.

Bottom Home Top