Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Phil Clayton
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For sure. North might have scanned again and discovered K.

Qxx Qx AJxx Qxxx is an opener so North needs a second high diamond for 6N to be right.

South's shape except for heart length was largely a black box.
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Charles, Im not sure I would equate sitting out a round against cheaters with vigilantism.
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Felix, you continue to amaze me.

The gymnasts that were profiled were as young as 6. Do you expect them to stand up for themselves?

Of course justice finally won out. But the initial allegations were made as early as 1997.

And frankly, it was the ‘mob’ that put the wheels of justice into motion.
May 6
Phil Clayton edited this comment May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you subscribe to HBO, check out “In the Heart of Gold”, which is about the sex abuse scandal in US Gymnastics and Larry Nassar.

This predator was able to flourish because people put more faith and trust in institutions and their staff over their own children.

I don't trust the WBF when they have made poor decisions with regards to cheating, doping and other critical issues. In Mr.Rennenkampff's eyes, the reliable mechanism is change out the board (which there isnt even an effective method to do so).

The only way change will happen is for people to disrupt.

Bravo Sabine and Roy, and all others that sit down and choose not to play against cheaters.

edited for spelling
May 6
Phil Clayton edited this comment May 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Never heard of the book, the author or the idea.
May 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How about we are playing game in hearts but slam can be either strain?
May 6
ATB
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
….ruled out with the 7 lead.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
On the posted hand, I thought the defenders might have been up to the same tricks. LHO actually did have KT9x of heatts but clubs were indeed 4-1.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The title comes from the idea that defenders can fake shortness on an opening lead to prevent a safety play in trump. The hand in the book (page 35) was JTx QJ9x 7xx 8xx and you hear:

1 3 (strong)
3 3 (denies club honor)
4 6

Courtney says he would lead a diamond against anyone but Seres. (I think a club could be right on a similar reasoning).

If declarer has a trump suit like

ATx

K87xx

A fake shortness lead could cause declarer to hope for 32 trump and not play low to the ten.

But Courtney led a spade. The layout was

Ax
ATx
Ax
AQJTxx

Kx
K87xx
KQ9xx
X

Seres deduced that because the defense didnt try the parlor trick of a fake shortness lead that trumps were indeed splitting and ruffed a diamind. Down 1.
May 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Maybe, but I don't think it's particularly relevant, do you?
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It's your choice.
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In Case 1, the positions are symmetrical - either opponent could have club shortness, or neither.

Case 2 is actually the one most interesting to me, because RHO is telling you the lead was from shortness, when he could have chosen not to. Putting falsecard considerations aside, this is definitely not the card is he known to hold, so what's his motivation?

I do not know the answer, but I think it's an interesting question.
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For me, 2 is just a max raise - 10-12 or so. 3 is more of a courtesy raise in the 8-10 range.

I like 3 - if partner has the blacks bottled up: AQx xx Jxxx JTxx, he will bid 3N himself. With the AQ + K, I would expect 3. If partner doesn't like 3N, neither do I.

3N is a blind shot.
May 4
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, since Roy is Sabine's partner Id say he has a dog in this fight.
May 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Felix, Im struggling to see what value you are providing to this discussion.

If you want to troll, then I suppose that is your god-given right, as it is mine to (re) block you.
May 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Felix, maybe I should know who you are, but I don't, other than what you write here. Maybe you have a point about what Sabine has written about in the past, and what they are planning in Istanbul. But so what?

By coming to a tournament, disrupting a movement, getting others to do the same through their example will have a much greater impact than just staying home.

If you are a tournament organizer, what do you fear more? A few pairs skipping the tourney, or a few pairs coming to the tourney and making a very public statement by not playing against cheats. And, imagine if the press shows up to report on this protest!

This is an absolute nightmare scenario if you are running an event.

So, in my view, Sabine and Roy are doing much more than staying home.
May 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It is through this type of civil disobedience that real change is effected.

The real change might be a dismantling of the WBF and a new organization to step up and govern uninfested tournaments.

I hope many follow your example and I hope there is public pressure to do so.

#saynotocheats
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“….then why on earth would he bid 2 on this hand”?

Because he felt like this was the best description of his hand?

Also, if West didn't think that was their agreement, do you think he is jamming game on 72?
May 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Steve, your argument seems to stem from Chris Monsour's crazy anarcho capitalist thread regarding discriminatory pricing last month which seemed like a theoretical discussion that people jumped on and endorsed.

We are paying for the same service. The fact that someone receives income is besides the point.

Should an Uber driver pay more tolls than you or me? The road doesnt know who has a paying customer. Should a hooker pay extra for a hotel room? If I run an e-business, should I pay more for internet than someone using it for a rotisserie league?

More to the point, if a pro charges for a speedball on BBO should they pay more.

Absurd. Just absurd.

Edit, I see Max and Michal used some of the same examples when this post was in draft.
May 1
Phil Clayton edited this comment May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Chris, re: the impacts of a policy for the kids getting paid won't have an impact on these players. They are good enough to start to make a living off the game and the chances of losing them is basically zero.

But a discount for juniors is a no brainer. Id see yoyr bet and raise and suggest the cost for the 0-20 age range could be as low as zero, although I would like to see them contribute to the USBF, SIVY, etc.., if we are lowering the fees to somthing minimal.
April 29
.

Bottom Home Top