Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Lipkin
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you. Indeed i saw it elsewhere. However my biggest uncertainty is how S could rebid 7NT after the 5 call of North's. It seems that 5 could have been made on many holdings insufficient for a grand slam in NT.
Dec. 23, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes. Excision seems necessary. Perhaps certain WBF administrators will resign.
Dec. 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Count me as an extremely weak player! I find the comment <adjective deleted>. The strongest difference between the two hands is partner's hand.
Dec. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(Because I have some inside info) I am very biased regarding this particular endeavor, and hence abstained from voting in Avon's polls. However I do care to clarify what I believe is an important point regarding some criticisms levied against these posts. The real issue is not just whether, by themselves, some bids seem outrageous. It is also whether any of them resulted in large loss of IMPs. For instance, suppose someone enters auctions many times, over more than a decade, with substandard length or strength. If he averages consistent positive results there seem to be two strong possibilities. He may be far ahead of his time- in which case his results should decline quickly as the rest of the world catches up, or he has illicit info.

One check would be to see if there is a striking change in bidding approach as certain technologies of bidding change.
Dec. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When your novice partner reaches the finals of the Bermuda Bowl will he still bid this way :) ?
Dec. 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
:) Don't torture us Avon! Publish!! :)
Dec. 4, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
phillip: does that mean you generally discourage (play low) with all length holdings, except a doubleton?
Nov. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play the jack, but only because I assume that you also play standard COUNT. With Qxx(xx…) in dummy, and NOT playing parity AK leads, my carding is COUNT not attitude. In the one partnership I have where the AK lead is parity based, I give attitude.
Nov. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
i am so sorry to hear this.
Nov. 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
a spectacular book at that!
Nov. 1, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When I used to play modified Beta with Jesus Arias and others 15 years ago, 1 and 1 were 4 or 5 card suits canape if we had a longer minor and 8-12 points. Our 1 was 13+ and the system played very well and was GCC.
Sept. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thank you KIT. One question for you is that you lumped in RKC with suits that get doubled. I assume that your description above is a bit different if the artificial asking bid is 4NT… did you imply in your answer D0P1 in that case?
Sept. 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very pretty Barry. For readers wishing to look this hand up, it is hand 5 from the Monday afternoon common game. There was another gem in the same set of boards; hand number 18 was typically played by East in three no-Trump, making 7 after the lead of the Q on a non-simultaneous double squeeze.
Sept. 13, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Christina Madsen's suggestion of 11 am and 4 pm sounds wonderful to me, but I am thinking as a full-time attendee (I voted for 10:30 and 3:30). It seems certain that local, commuting, attendees would be severely inconvenienced by such a schedule as it would lock up much of the day.
However, it certainly could be made the schedule of NABC+ events whose participants are likely to be national full-timers.
Aug. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Many years ago I made an admittedly snarky comment about start times. For the cities with vibrant night-life, you know which ones those are, but say NYC, Chicago, Montreal, opt for the early schedule; else the traditional one. Unlike that original comment, I will not give an illustration of a central city dead from the evening up.
Aug. 27, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
thanks. two really interesting boards from this match were Board 22, where a ruffing squeeze allowed ten tricks to be made at one table and was missed at the other leading to a game swing, and a 6 contract that was missed when Pepsi did not show 2 KC + void leading to a slam swing. (Sorry for missing the complete discussion earlier)
Aug. 19, 2017
Mike Lipkin edited this comment Aug. 19, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have no axe to grind. But I am curious what the general view of the community is about allowing day two drop-ins. Any comments?
July 29, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David Gurvich and I play “Cincinnati carding” in which 3-card holdings are disambiguated as follows: xxx, lead high; 9xx, txx, jxx, lead mud; Hxx lead third. This is possible in conjunction with low from 2 little. We have had pretty clear defensive understanding.
The leads are due to Jerry Fink and Judy Cohen and discussed in “Power Defensive Carding”.
June 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree. Often I will do that, but your point is very good.
June 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was playing with a student against an expert. Knowing (with high likelihood) that he would be unlikely to duck, I did go up K. Unfortunately my opponent was an expert and he dropped partner's Q on the next round!
June 2, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top