Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Mike Nelson
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 82 83 84 85
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Back in the day, I used the formula 5 minutes per board plus 5 minutes, so two boards=15 minutes, three boards=20 minutes, four boards=25 minutes, etc. IIRC, I got those numbers from an ACBL publication of the time.
17 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Edgar Kaplan recommended 1NT-(?)-X be played as takeout in order to collect more penalties. 1NT opener is more likely than responder to have length in the enemy suit.
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Even Marty Bergen acknowledges a double of 7 is penalty.
23 hours ago
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
With 12 points, I'd want them to include a probable double stop in spades. OTOH, I'd bid 1NT with 14 if the spades weren't wide open.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The report it not a penalty, it is documentation for future reference so directors/club administrators can distinguish a one-off ZT violation from a chronic problem. And you are correct that the record could conceivably be reversed on appeal, but not the DP itself, which is undoubtedly covered by Law 93 B 3. This is assuming that ACBL defines ZT violations as DP's. If they unaccountably treat them as procedural penalties, these are reversible.
Oct. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It should be noted that a ZT penalty is a law 91 disciplinary penalty, and an appeals committee cannot reverse it per Law 93 B 3, though they can suggest a director reverse himself.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
7= is the correct ruling, but I don't think it should be. If the laws were designed to deter all but obvious claims, 7-1.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
South's pass is only defensible if North's double is not merely “penalty” but “pure penalty”=“if you bid, you'd better have slam in your own cards”, which wouldn't be anybody's agreement in this situation, IMHO.
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the best hand for key card is the one with more strength in the side suits,especially kings.
Oct. 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed, this would stop a lot of unsophisticated cheating in it's tracks. There are lot more stupid cheats than smart ones. BTW, there are more stupid honest players than smart ones as well.
Oct. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“You have the high cards, I have the clubs. He stuck his neck out, here comes the axe!” I would expect doubler has a minimum opening a club stack behind the bidder. I wouldn't be surprised to see dummy broke with a club void. LHO is gonna bleed like he was bitten by Dracula.
Oct. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also, most player underestimate the equity value of a part score. Jean Besse estimated as high as +220 for a partial of 60 or more at game-all, a lot more than at duplicate. Rubber isn't imps, and partials are the main reason. Chicago is closer to imps than actual Rubber Bridge is, but not exactly the same.
Oct. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But the equity value of advancing the rubber is included in the calculation of the percentages.
Oct. 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
S. J. Simon stresses this even more than the game vs. slam decision, as it so much more frequent that adds up to more money over time.
Oct. 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If I'm losing heavily it's for one of these reasons or a combination:

1) I'm unlucky today
2) I'm outclassed today
3) I'm playing badly today

All of these reduce the chance I'll actually make a theoretical 50% slam (or any 5O% event).
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(posted in error deleted)
Sept. 28
Mike Nelson edited this comment Sept. 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm a US American and a beer drinker. To me Bud or Miller Light taste like they've been drunk before, and Coors Light like its been drunk before twice. So if the offering is Bud or Miller, I'll lead 7. If Coors, I'll lead 7 out of turn, even as Dummy.
Sept. 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Support X should not apply to a natural 1NT overcall in the sandwich position. Opp stuck his neck out, now if you have the cards, swing the axe already. Now support X of an artificial 1NT is fine.
Sept. 24
Mike Nelson edited this comment Sept. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Auction 1: I prefer 3 to be invitation asking for trump quality, so it can also be 1-2-3 stop if 3 bidder has good enough trumps that 2 bidder wont have them. (Similar to 1-2-3).

Auction 2: should be 8-11ish with exactly four spades, with 5+ spades jump to 3, playing the usual advances.

I actually prefer a 1NT advance to be artificial, similar to 2NT after the X of a weak two. playing this method,I would bid 2 directly with 5+ spades and go through 1NT first with only 4.
Sept. 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can make a case for X=“lead your own suit, don't try to hit mine I have help in your suit” in this auction. At this vul, partner will have a decent suit but no entries and may hesitate to lead from his suit into opponent's announced stoppers. I don't know that this is the best use of X of 3NT, but it's not crazy. But I don't think X should be lead directing at all in this auction, just pure penalty.
Sept. 17
Mike Nelson edited this comment Sept. 17
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 82 83 84 85
.

Bottom Home Top