Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Sathya Bettadapura
1 2 3 4 ... 48 49 50 51
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The hand diagram should be fixed now. For some reason, just specifying three hands which should normally work did not, so I had to specify all four hands.
May 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Is this the hand where declarer had Tx in dummy opposite AQ8xxx in hand ? I saw Fred Stuart playing it. He dropped the stiff King offside and then end-played RHO in trumps ! Well played to both of you ?
May 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This came up in BBO team match. Not sure of EW agreements. It's my best guess.
May 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
AJxxxx KQxx x xx is plenty for an opening these days. If you don't think so, you didn't watch the USBC trials much :)
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Right. As Khokan also pointed out J play caters to RHO holding KQX as well as Hxx as long you are prepared to finesse on the second round of trumps. If trumps are 2-2 and RHO wins the first trump and then follows low you will go down when trumps are Hx in each hand. But that's the only case where this line of play goes wrong. I think it's superior to either of the other two.
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No it doesn't. East wins the first trump with an honor and he still has Hxx left when you have only one entry left to dummy. If East has KQxx of trumps you can't make it. It's a choice between playing him for KQx or Hxx. And of course if trumps are 2-2 any way works.
May 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
From declarer's perspective, why couldn't you be doing this with Qxxxx ? If declarer has the J it doesn't matter. But if he has two little s he has a choice of either playing you for the actual holding or your partner for a stiff Quack.
May 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We found teammates.
May 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Watching the trials is like watching a mini-Bermuda Bowl. The teams that make it to the semi-finals of US trials will easily be competitive in any World Championship, but unfortunately the rules only for two teams from the US, not four.

The technique that team Nickell displayed is what we think of as expert Bridge. Whether it was Rodwell's play of 4 on day#1 or Weinstein's defense against 4 after a 3 pre-empt by partner today, there were so many thoughtful plays. Thanks for treating us to such wonderful Bridge. Looking forward to seeing a lot more of it in Lyon !
May 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes the Open event.
May 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Still looking.
May 1
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you bid 3 LHO bids 4. Partner has Kx AKxx JTx Jxxx. 6 is a great contract without a lead…
April 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If 4 is Kickback Exclusion, partner responds no Aces, hopefully that's the first step in your methods, so 4.
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We have a winner, Ben Kristensen !

Dummy has QTxxx xx KQxx Ax and declarer 9x KJx Ax KQTxxx. On the lead of 5 declarer might yet make ten tricks by putting up the Queen, but leading a high honor gives the defense little chance.
April 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Gene. Once you have won an event in a limited flight you have to encourage people to play up. If they don't, may be it's not a bad idea to REQUIRE them to do so. Whether winning at the National level or district level should be the criterion for barring a player from playing the same flight again is the question.

As our team won the event at the National level in 2014, I stayed away from GNT A for two years. But I had an opportunity to play on a good team with friends this year, so I played in GNT A again. But I'd have no problem if there was a law that barred me from playing in GNT A again.
April 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Those who passed for penalty got it right. Partner had Qxxxx Kx AQTxx Q and had an easy double if you passed RHO's 5. RHO had both honors, so 4 makes but 5 fails. Opponents are down 2. If partner had the same cards in pointed suits but AX and X, you would make 5, but at IMPs partner would still double I guess. As is often the case it would have been harder at MP.
April 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As I see it there're multiple problems here. In low population districts logistics is a problem. In high population districts good teams are penalized simply because of the sheer number of better teams in their districts compared to their low-density counterparts. A unified on-line tournament across districts solves both problems. The tournament can be held in multiple rounds over a period of time. The tournament has to be monitored to ensure that there're no illegal communications among participants. So people may have to travel to their local club with their devices that let them connect to the internet. The solution is not perfect as it does exclude people who can not play on-line. But considering that it solves otherwise unsolvable problems it might be an acceptable one.
April 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Aaron,

To some extent it depends on how many experts you have in your district. In our district, District 21, we have three hall of famers and at least 5 National champions. If they decide to play the GNT the rest of us don't have too much of a realistic chance as the results of the last two years would testify to.

You can argue that GNT Open is meant for National Champions anyway and that's the reason Flight A was separated from Open Flight. But in the NAOP you don't have that distinction. If the abovementioned experts decide to compete, the rest if us don't have much chance in the NAOP either and there're many players who can not play in a lower flight as they have too many MPs. May be we should have Open Flight and Flight A in the NAOP's too perhaps ?

The other problem I noticed when I played in the GNT A Finals (and won the event) in the summer Nationals in Las Vegas 2014 is that the strength of districts varies a lot. Quite a few of the teams we played were weaker than many D21 Flight B teams. Our second round D21 match was closer than the closest match we faced in Las Vegas.

My estimate is that among the 25 districts there're only five or six districts that are upto the strength of a given flight. This makes it an unfair contest for those of us who happen to live in stronger districts. My guess is that a couple of D21 teams in any flight can probably take on teams from a higher flight from many other districts.
April 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because you play Gazzilli and you can show a balanced 15-17 over 1nt if need be. So you don't have to suppress a good suit.
April 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Whether you're in a force or not, it's clear opponents are sacrificing and partner bid 4 expecting 4 to make. I do hope partner doesn't pass if you do :)
April 13
1 2 3 4 ... 48 49 50 51
.

Bottom Home Top