Join Bridge Winners
All comments by John Larkin
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 55 56 57 58
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Come on guys….we're all concerned about the vigilantes being a bit over-zealous in their approach to ch&@ting; now you come up with your rather worrying plans for us slow-coaches….

MRosenberg will probably extrapolate some exponential punishment for slow ch&@ting
an hour ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
PT: I suppose Avon's hypothesis is that the Blue Team were using extraneous signals as part of their bidding system - not that their actual bids didn't mean anything. So when Avarelli “denies” three spades with his bid, partner might believe him.
11 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Tricky math(s)
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Comment deleted.
Oct. 17
John Larkin edited this comment Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
West could not have seen card, so it is not exposed. In that regard, the fact that South saw it is irrelevant. It would be the same as catching a glimpse in East's hand. It has no bearing - any more than one would allow East to shout out a glimpse and say this should now be a penalty card.
South's unfortunate glimpse on this occasion was avoidable, but I agree with comment above that simple advice would be appropriate. That's a judgement call.
The second ruling would have been correct (unauthorised info once penalty card picked up) if the first had been. However, it should never have come into the reckoning.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
When one says “ducked”, I have always taken it to mean that the player could have won/tried to win trick, but didn't.
Is that the case?
Oct. 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But it seems to assume that you are guilty.
Oct. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed.
It may be that going into the constitutions of the ACBL, EBL etc. and carefully amending them so that all of the stipulations, penalties etc. that you would like to have been there in writing are now there in writing will be enough. The main problems with courts is often when organisations do not go through their own processes correctly. If it is not written down that you have a right to ban X&Y from playing in Z tournament if they are found to have broken rules A or B or C then the courts can probably stop you banning them.
So a careful re-vamp of the constitutions I would think the most important next step for the future.
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You're right. So right. Just absolutely right!
(Superceding the point).
And minuscule may well be a strong adjective…
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Weirdly, to the layman, it's the opponents' bidding in hands 99 and 100 that I find odd. Like which South hand to open a diamond, and when to leave in a take-out double.
Oct. 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“His rash fierce blaze of riot cannot last.” ?
Seems a shame.
I am unsure exactly how your leagues worked (I know, you did explain…) but
Viz-a-viz earlier comments re UK etc.
Are players within your teams “connected” in any way? Where they come from etc.? Or are they just collections of the best people you can get together?
I think the leagues continue e.g. In Scotland because
1 They are club-orientated (though each club can have more than one team).
2 Also, divisions with promotion and relegation. Do you have that?
3 They last a full year/season. Maybe if you have too many “leagues” in one year, the novelty wearsoff, and the tension is not maintained.
4 each match is a separate event between two teams.

Playing for one of the teams in your club is just something you do.
Many people don't know you get our “master points” for any match you win.

Just some thoughts. Good luck if you take it up again
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To the layman…

The wording of 1 is unusual, in that it talks about “cheaters” as a whole, then in subsection d introduces “non-collusive cheating”, without having stipulated that the above was re collusive.

Also odd that only later is “cheating” defined; and in these definitions, I found 3bi2 (an agreement not to play with a partner equalling a determination of cheating?) unusual.
Oct. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rotating blades sound an interesting development…
Oct. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good question. Otherwise, we must assume they don't trust each other.
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yep. Got it (oddly enough, and the technique)
Was actually wondering how you worked your “scoring” for the reader.
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Very enjoyable.
Couple of confusions for the uninitiated.
Didn't quite get understand maths at end.
The lead-irrelevant, double-dummy…if your first plan makes 11, you get the extra points?
Oct. 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Give the guy a break…
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
So how did I guess…?…
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
ML: Fair enough reply.
Still not convinced by “attributed” for a clearly written fictional line.
Greatest not = noblest.
Still think there is a Rubicon reference.
But…. fair do's. All at border of OK (as Rubicon would say)
J

PS Und Das Glasperlenspiel?
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With me or ML?
Oct. 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 55 56 57 58
.

Bottom Home Top