Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Nikos Delimpaltadakis
1 2 3 4 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Advancing” situation. Because here without the advancer there is no guarantee for a continued auction.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
deleted
June 15
Nikos Delimpaltadakis edited this comment June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have seen coffeehouse games better organised than this qualifying event.

I am very curious if there is an appeal procedure in front of the organising committee of the national event. Ok we learned that ACBL commented that using a round-robin to qualify one out of three teams is acceptable procedure. It's inferior, but ok is legal.

Lack of proper, written, conditions of contest though, is by itself a good enough reason to cancel this fiasco.

And in order to show the other side of the coin, I should add that this would never happen in a jurisdiction where bridge is part of the sports structure of the area, because there is always a higher sports court/authority that would examine such appeals and cancel an amateurish (and sketchy) qualifying tournament like this one.
May 31
Nikos Delimpaltadakis edited this comment May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is worth mentioning that in his usual “larger than life” approach, Zia sent Mariusz the MOST prestigious medal from his collection.
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The Heroes we need!
May 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I stand corrected!
April 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Declarer took much less than the expected time and this is one more excuse for the defence but they never took advantage for it.
April 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Krzysztof Martens
Dec. 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
After you vote, you can find the board here: http://tinyurl.com/y7bw74ty
Oct. 14, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also there aren't sooo many books and moreover most of them are outdated. By outdated I mean that other bright minds have indeed built “better mousetraps” and they win with them consistently, however these improved and more modern systems aren't described in any of the books.
Sept. 1, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To lighten up the mood, this discussion brought me in mind a partner of mine decades ago.
When an opponent did a theatrical hesitation in order to mislead him, he told him calmly:
“You know, I'm not the type of guy that calls the director. Next time you will do this, I will punch you.”
Aug. 16, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The new initiative is quite welcomed. However, I would like to take a moment to appreciate and acknowledge what have been accomplished so far.

Boye says that is not a very impressive feat. In terms of number convictions he is probably right, but in terms of what we live at the table or as spectators, the picture have big positive changes.

Titles are not anymore shared among the usual suspects. Yes the good teams are often there, but not only them and not always the same. We have started again to see pairs to not be always right. Even if some were not convicted or even accused, I have a feeling that they applied some kind of “self-censorship”.
Or maybe they don't feel the need to do something wrong anymore, in order to compete with well known cheaters.

I have always the fear that this better environment, that have been created, may not last long. Everyone may start feeling relaxed and old habits may return for a few. I hope not, but we have to keep our eyes open.

To conclude is ok to discuss the next step, but please let's never end the discussion on how we will secure our current, hard earned step.
Aug. 15, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Card playing clubs where always thriving during periods of crisis. I know from older people that during WWII and the German occupation the poker clubs where doing really great.
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The club managers will be very keen to find you partners, don't worry!
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Greece 95% of tournaments start at 20:30, more or less.
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
0-25 5%
26-40 10%
41-60 42%
61+ 43%
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's great. My only experience with a big metropolis is New York which do not reach the numbers you are mentioning for London. But maybe I am wrong again. Let me ask you something else. All the duplicate games you are mentioning, are official EBU ones? Giving masterpoints, the results being published on line in EBU database etc? Or some of them are more casual games?
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think that the metro area counts in this case so Sheffield numbers are quite high with less than half the metro population.
June 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks for the clarification Lawrence. Under this light, I think even 5 are not permissible anymore, because the hesitation suggests partner is not short on spades and this eliminates the possibility 5 to be a phantom save.

On the other hand with short spades partner maybe was hesitating to double 4. Oh well…
April 25, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4
P
4
P

I do not understand the distinction between the pair of questions.
I suppose I shouldn't change my opinion depending on my partner's break of tempo. I should bid whatever I was planning to bid without the break of tempo.

I am genuinely puzzled by this and I am not saying to provoke a reaction. For example I see Kit saying “Without hesitation I might bid 4. WITH hesitation I will bid 5. So we have a player, with the best of intentions, that changes his planned bid based on partner's hesitation. Isn't this ”use“ of UI? Even if it's purpose is self-harm in order to ”burn" partner's hesitation?

In other words, if we are going to be the judge of partner's UI aren't we actually DOING exactly the thing we shouldn't do? Base our bid ON the hesitation? Even if the purpose changes now and is not to find the best contract, but to find the best contract not punishable because of UI.

I think the correct thing to do is to bid what you would bid anyway, call the director yourself and be ready to face the consequences if the decision won't be favourable. In our days I think that this is resolved not by the director him/herself but after a poll he/she conducts among players at your level.

With that said, as a footnote, I think that in competitive bids on 4 level and higher there should be an obligatory pause, similar with the ones after a skip bid.
April 25, 2018
1 2 3 4 5
.

Bottom Home Top