Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Phil Clayton
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Mike: “Making assumptions based on past experience doesn't cut it”.

Would you say if the CofC do not change from the prior year that making an assumption would cut it?
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nor does he deny it.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not a huge fan of 6 at Matchpoints. At IMPs I would bid it in a heartbeat.

Pretty good contract actually.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Er stiff spade…
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Freudian.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The discussion about a stiff club after 2N is a red herring. With 1=4=4=4, partner would certainly rebid 3, and with 1=4=5=3, I would expect a 3 call.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Some highlights from my previous post:

From 2016: The Clayton team won five of their six Saturday matches and, on Sunday, beat both of their opponents to finish first.

The 2016 CofC contains the same language in the current CofC:

“The District 22 GNT Finals are knockout team events scored by IMPs (and
converted to VP’s when a team plays in a round robin”.


Yet, the final was scored in IMPs and the winner was decided by the fact they won both matches.

Draw your own conclusions.
June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did a little research to back up my previous statement about the format D22 used:

2018] - Three teams in the final

https://web.archive.org/web/20180626064604/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gnt.php

D22 CofC: Link if broken but URL refers to “2016 - 2018” CofC - so it's probably the same as 2017.

2017: - Two teams in Final (I think)

Results - https://web.archive.org/web/20170706044435/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/

2017 D22 CoC: https://web.archive.org/web/20170613195422/http://web2.acbl.org/coc/GNT2016-17.pdf

2016 - Three teams in final

Results: https://web.archive.org/web/20160513220221/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gnt.php

CofC: https://web.archive.org/web/20160419104711/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/2016/D22_GNT_2015-2016_CoC.pdf

2015 - Two teams in final

Results: https://web.archive.org/web/20150905040054/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gnt.php

and https://web.archive.org/web/20160414004843/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gntpicts.php

2015-2016 GNT CofC:

https://web.archive.org/web/20160419104711/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/2016/D22_GNT_2015-2016_CoC.pdf

2014-Three teams in final

Results: https://web.archive.org/web/20150119005222/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gntpicts.php

2014 CofC:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150119005236/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gnt2015/gnt2015_CoC.html#COC

2013 - Two teams in final

Results: https://web.archive.org/web/20130625000503/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/

2013 CofC: https://web.archive.org/web/20130120092726/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gnt2012_CoC.html

2012 - Two teams in final

Results: https://web.archive.org/web/20120720110708/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/

2012 CofC: https://web.archive.org/web/20121008170419/http://acbldistrict22.com/D22/DIR/GNT/gnt2012_CoC.html

(edited formatting of urls)
June 1
Phil Clayton edited this comment June 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Something else to consider:

If in years past D22 used IMPs instead of VPs for the final day, and the pertinent sections of the CofC did not change, there would be a clear precedent established.

To the best of my knowledge, Shailesh, Wei and team have never competed on Sunday much less won the Opwn (congratulations btw) so they would not have known this. They have won the A flight before, so they also know using VPs is unusual for the GNTs.
May 31
Phil Clayton edited this comment May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What are your agreements about 4N over 4? Some use it to play, some use it to ask for Kings.

I'm not a fan of 4. You know the answer and it wastes a few steps. 5 clearly asks for Kings, but its a strange call once we have denied the trump queen.

Once West asks for Kings, East looking at AKQJx could comfortably bid 7. However, you know partner must have A,A, AKxxx, so you can count 13 and try 7N.
May 31
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I clawed it into 7 via 6N. Pard had Axx AKxxx AKxx x.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Andy, I dont agree with them either but its hardly irrational.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm great friends with Rick, Walt and Finn's dad so I'm not the most unbiased person. I'm also friends with a few of the winning team.

I played in the D22 Open and have made it to the final on a number of occasions. Sometimes two teams make Sunday and sometimes its three.

I have never, ever seen the final played with VPs. As a matter of fact, I have never seen ANY three way match scored with VPs. It's utterly absurd. If you beat both teams in a round robin you WIN. End of story. What happens between the other two teams is inconsequential.

Now, if all teams finish 1-1, then apply your differential method of choice.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I bid 3 at the table.

If partner has xx Txxx KQx AKJx or so, 3N seems like its the better spot. When pard bid 4 I wasn't sure if its a better than 4. Not very likely but I carelessly passed.

Pard had xx A8xx Kxx KQxx.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree! Even if partner won't have a 1444, there's no reason why 3N can't be better.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Under 2, 2 created a GF.

3. Undiscussed but it feels like a good 4342 or 4333 to me.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Over 1N it's a slam try with a good suit. No idea what it would be after 2.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Does D21 have the open flight last or first? In D22, we had Open and B on the first weekend and A and C on the 2nd weekend. The motivation was to spurn attendance, and it works.

In ‘13 and ’16, I won the Open and then played in the A flight and did poorly, perhaps because I felt slightly dirty for playing in an event that I had no intention of continuing. Pretty sure I was even hired. Yes, I told my A teammates they would have to replace me (more dirtiness).

My viewpoint was not universal. There was a good team of young players that won both the B and the C with slightly different teammates. They dropped their B teammates to play the C flight because their chances were better at the NABC of winning (and they did).

In my new district (16), all teams play the same weekend but they seem to have liberal augmentation rules, so while you do not get as much attendance, you avoid the (perceived) moral hazard.

These issues do not have the same gravitas as the team trials, but they represent an accurate microcosm. I can see players that win the Mixed and Seniors choosing to play in the less-prestigious Mixed because it is easier to win. Full disclosure is key in bridge, and presumably their teammates know their decision up front because I can see some ugly bidding war between clients if someone wins both.
May 29
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well WE know partner doesnt have 3…
May 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Unbalanced because of 1. 2N probably infers a 5th but not discussed.
May 27
.

Bottom Home Top