Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sandeep Thakral
1 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You don't believe West's story despite the sequences being in n their system notes as shown to director and submitted prior to start of tournament as mentioned in the thread earlier?
That's interesting.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Let's look at what the law says -
Law 75 C
When the partnership agreement has been explained correctly, the mistake being the call made
and not the explanation, there is no infraction. The explanation must not be corrected (nor must
the Director be notified) immediately and there is no obligation to do so subsequently.
Regardless of damage, the result stands .

21B1b (b) The Director is to presume Mistaken Explanation rather than Mistaken Call in the
absence of evidence to the contrary.
There is evidence that explanation (or none, assumed natural) is correct, N passed.
The key question I have is - “ the explanation must not be corrected” - but it was corrected, S stated that his bid was a mistaken bid. What are the implications now? Does that make it a mistaken explanation? This is the question we need answer to. If this now makes it a case of mistaken explanation then the law clearly says if there is a damage to NFO due to misexplanation the adjusted score must be awarded.
The damage is clear and obvious, notwithstanding their ability to cope with it.

Please give your views on this aspect.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So, I asked specifically about these two questions now - 2h by east and 3d by west. East's comment - a 2h by me wd be an active help try in heart given dbl (shortage game try diamonds) and pass are available. This is not what I want to convey. I want to say that knowing I am not a 4 card or ultralight opener, if you want to bid game on your own, you are welcome to it - I will not accept a general purpose try, but will accept if pd specifically asks for help in hearts - and hedge if he asks for help in clubs.
Pds 3d is a general purpose help try, or d shortage - neither of which I am accepting as stated earlier.

Hope this helps.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“both 2♣ and pass of 2♦ were alerted on both sides of screen, and it was explained on both sides (E to N at the moment he bid, W to S when 3♠ pass came to him which is when he asked) .
That 2♦ pass is encouraging in this scenario is documented in the system notes submitted prior to start of the tourney. (Precisely it says - a raise that commits us to x level, passes of any bids below that level are forcing and encouraging, beyond that level are not, bidding the level of commitment is weakest action)”

These are facts as ascertained on the table, what you are saying is not only conjecture, its an assumption that you are making and then accusing NS of non-disclosure without anything other than your gut to back you.
Whether you like it or not, people are entitled to not only have agreement, but also remember and disclose them.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
wd you allow him 4 if infact 4 were making and he passes 3? whatever he does he is in a fix and have the accusation of double shot because of a situation that is not of his making. He'd have been happy to have the auction reverted and be given the chance to bid 3 as he told the director, but the law doesn't allow it, forces him to take an action, and flip side of it is always a double shot.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Cos he thinks he can make a game opp say Ajxx Axx xx xxxx or AJxx Jxx xx Axxx. Or even Axxx xxx Ax xxxx. Not even the best hands for druries. Also because he knows that in their pdship style his pd wd need an exceptional hand to bid again if he bids 2.
and yes, it was asked.
Also, why he bid 3 - and his explanation was given pd is never going to bid again (pass of 3) he wasn't happy about passing 3 with 9 carder fit, wasn't happy about making a dbl (which wd be a shortage game try) so chose to compete to his level as suggested by law of total tricks.

West's contention was that in light of the auction, his pd can easily have upto 13 or bad 14 (yes he can have 12 and some 11s too), with some length (no dbl), but not 4 cards (he'd likely choose to defend). Against a number of such hands 4 wd make especially when you expect opps to have 9 diamonds (cue raise of a passed hand with a hand that definitely can't have 13/14 hcp)
Oct. 12
Sandeep Thakral edited this comment Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Well, you lose your bet - the explanation of 2 and pass of 2 is not in doubt at all, as agreed by opponents.
Why would you assume something when you are being told that is not the case?
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
both 2 and pass of 2 were alerted on both sides of screen, and it was explained on both sides (E to N at the moment he bid, W to S when 3 pass came to him which is when he asked) .
That 2 pass is encouraging in this scenario is documented in the system notes submitted prior to start of the tourney. (Precisely it says - a raise that commits us to x level, passes of any bids below that level are forcing and encouraging, beyond that level are not, bidding the level of commitment is weakest action)
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
when did south get a chance to start with 3? over 1? Even a + bid - normal or not - requires an alert, which incidentally he did not have.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The agreement is that 3 is a raise in diamonds (as per his understanding of bidding), which requires an alert.
Nobody said anything about 2 showing a game interest - specifically mentioned that 2 wd be the weakest action.
Why would you be sceptical about a bid that a player expressly said he wanted to make given the explanation?
There is no hypothetical situation, South didn't hold clubs - it was never a club + diamond or only clubs scenario.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Going by the explanation that double specifically says non-spade lead, South's rdbl is obviously saying that he is worried about some non-spade lead, the most obvious candidate being heart. This is especially clear when you see Club king in your own hand. So, the only message can be that he is missing HA, certainly possible within the context of auction. Would partner be worried if were missing HA, but had a spade honor - absolutely not. So we must give him a hand that is missing HA and has no values in spades. Such a hand is definitely possible (KJ or KQ H, DK, AQ or AQJ clubs), so running is clear. Absent the lead directional explanation, pd would have to run himself if he so desired, since our agreement is business. Whether it makes sense or not, its the only possible hand on which pd will have doubts. Unless you tell me that NS do not have the agreement about rdbl being doubt showing, it is clear that I have been forced to run because of misexplanation.
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Not as opponent, in the event everybody played the same boards in all matches. These are the instances where we were in same direction, or they were on the other table in a direct match .
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Deleted
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can think of at least 10 hands in last 4 events where my pdship opened 3rd seat and theirs didn't.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
They admitted to have opened light 2/3 times earlier in a 2 year + partnership. How many times did the opportunity present itself? Nobody is keeping a record. However, playing more or less the same events, either as teammates or as opponent ( and a very long standing partner of one of this pdship) I know my pdship opens 3rd seat a lot more frequently than this one does. So opportunities were definitely there.
Oct. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The event is supposed to be played under wbf 2017 laws. Other than that there are no special coc. Consider the event to be equivalent to a Bermuda bowl selection trial, with the same set of laws applicable.
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
okay but why would you not balance 2 Spade? after 1N P P partner is known to have some values, and you are not going to get rich defending 1N on this hand
Sept. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Team Trials in India. Winners of certain national events over the year are invited to participate. Full/double round robin followed by KOs depending on number of teams participating.
Sept. 25, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
6 can make if RHO has Q or Qx - finesse 1st round, cash A dropping Q, cash T and overtake 7 with K.
Aug. 17, 2015
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd bet the declarer holds the A. He's missing Ace of his own suit, will he really risk AK being cashed when 6 might be on. You need to figure out the chances of declarer holding A singleton, or partner producing some help in to set up a suit (JTx for example).
That said, it sounds like they have a lot of minor high cards so a minor lead isn't going to help and could cost.
So yes, lead is likely to give us the best chance of beating the slam, but not because Ace is likely to be on the table. I'd double, it's the reasoning I don't agree with.
July 29, 2015
1 2
.

Bottom Home Top