Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Peter Jan Plooy
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 44 45 46 47
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stefan, you're right, sloppy writing on my side.

I was triggered by the coincidence of partner having the exact suit that Dale describes, leading to the loss of a trick because I could not read the 8 as being partners lowest card.

The fact that I had signaled preference for this suit using UDCA has nothing to do with it.
Feb. 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hence the word “Modified”, I presume…
Feb. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Allan, you missed the George Clooney series?

(BTW, strictly speaking these are Nespresso ads, from the same company)
https://youtu.be/DfyeXrdZZ1o
Feb. 18
Peter Jan Plooy edited this comment Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is Damiani applying for the Nescafé ad job?
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We play UDCA, and my partner had exactly Dale's hand last week. I had signaled preference for this suit, and partner led the 8 through declarer. I could not read it, and let dummy's Q make the trick…
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So what is the quote? The suspense is killing me…
Feb. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, “harumfrodite” does.
Soldier an' sailor too (Kipling).
So now you know, when you see one…
Feb. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was wondering the same thing. It seems the OP is of the opinion that 5NT cannot possibly be demonstrably suggested over one of the alternatives. So we are not asked to judge whether 5NT is dubious.

What the actual question is, in the context of Laws 16B and 73, I don't understand.
Feb. 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This doesn't work.
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe your “softer feel” is a based on a bias connected to the “language of love”?
“Doit” really means “must”.
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mon français est très lent?
Did you actually mean “slow”?
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Please don't swing dead cats around anywhere…
Feb. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“East-West admitted they have been pre alerted, and have discussed the defence against weak NT. (…)
East say he was not alerted by North, and forgot the Weak NT (this was the second and last board played against these opponents)”

So within 10 minutes of discussing their defense against weak NT East already forgot that NS play weak NT? And he did not notice the Alert card in the tray? And he didn't wake up after North asked again?

The ruling may be formally correct, but really…
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Patrick, I don't think the usage of the word “must” in the Regulations can be equated to their usage in the Laws.
Surely not placing the Alert card in the correct position is not “a serious matter indeed”, worthy of “the strongest word”.
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That would be:
KQxxx
Jxxx
Qx
Jx
for the non-French of us ;)
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's not a grammar mistake, but you would help your non-French readers by using the English abbreviations of the honours: K, Q and J.

Also: when indicating a card it is best to put the suit in front: K as opposed to K. This is especially helpful to distinguish for example 2 (contract) from 2 (card).

“Chose” is already a past tense, so “chosed” is overdoing it ;)

You don't end up “at” a contract but “in” a contract.

Here endeth the pedantry. Sorry, but you asked for it ;)
Feb. 12
Peter Jan Plooy edited this comment Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Louis, you've got N and S reversed…
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
John, it seems we have at least one pet hate in common :)
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
David, slight correction: "Hier steh' ich. Ich kann nicht anders".
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“might of gotten”
That's a word combination I don't recognise from the Queen's English…
Feb. 12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 44 45 46 47
.

Bottom Home Top