Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Yu Chang
1 2 3 4 5 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed, however…

Of course, Bridge is a game of probability/chances, nothing is absolutely right.
The issue is which bid (Pass X, 2C, or 2H) gives you best chance to be successful in the long term.

Looking at the actual hand/results is just to show that only 3 of 13 chose to pass.
This is pretty consistent with the poll result.

By switching the N and E hands, NS has an reasonable easy 1NT (or 2NT with slow defense).
Even so, EW playing DONT may stop at 2C -1 for a good score.
Even in worst case, EW playing Capp could stop at 3C -2, which will beat those allowing 1NT make 2.
April 22
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If you play Multi-Landy, you do not need help.
If you do not play it, it is not relevant.

If you care to find out, you will google it.
If you do not care, I will not help someone who has no time or desire to help himself.

I have nothing more to say or time to waste on this.
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just in case someone is curious, here is the actual board.

http://www.paloaltobridge.com/gameresults/lorisue/C180418E.htm
Board 17.

Both sides has 9 card fit.

Only 3 out of 13 west passed and NS stopped at 2S safely. EW got near bottom or Ave-.

10 of 13 West competed with various results.

1 out of 13 west competed but allowed NS to make 3S. EW got share bottom.
1 out of 13 EW competed too high to 4H and went -2 undoubled. EW got Ave-.

6 out of 13 NS got pushed to 3S and -1. EW got Ave+.
1 out of 13 west won the contract at 2H and got near top.
1 out of NS went to 4S doubled -2. EW got top.
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“it shouldn't be adequate for an article on this site.”

Respectfully I disagree.

I would not want to insult players reading this site by wasting bandwidth with detail descriptions of these very common conventions.
If someone did not know, he/she could simply google or ask (like some did here).

As far I can see, the only question was what X means in Multi-Landy/Woolsey.
There is a very good book you can buy on amazon (I thought it was sold on this site but could not find it now).

https://www.amazon.com/Multi-Landy-Killer-Defense-Versus-Notrump/dp/1771401613
April 21
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used to have an agreement with an old partner to use XX to show 44+ Majors.
But I like yours too.

Does this transfer require 5-card suit?

Or like transfer after 1C open (without takeout), you can transfer with 4-card suit?
April 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would not be surprised to see overwhelm majority to pick standard.
Most probably do not feel there needs to be an agreement other than standard.

But if you have any thoughts/ideas, I would love to heart about them.

Actually, same question for P (P) 1C (X) XX too.

Thanks ahead.
April 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Because I trust human nature, no one would be trying to deceive in such a disgusting way.

But of course, I may be too naive to think that way.
.
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hitch is reactive. Remark is active.

I think the remark is less likely to be deceiving but you still cannot draw conclusion.
You still have to decide whether to finesse.
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Max. Good players (usually) has pride and would not use the remark to deceive.
A weak player probably did not know restrict choices and thought his/her QJ will be dropped
since that is how he/she would play.

But for a good player like Steve, the remark would not change his decision, the percentage play is still to finesse.

Also, if they really try to deceive, they would not make it obvious by saying something.

I would always give the opponents benefit of the doubt unless the acting/action is obvious.
Such as hitch with a singleton or with 2 equal cards like KQ doubleton.

Another example, in a club game, my partner lead a high spot card through dummy's Kxx toward my AJxx. This declarer thought about it for awhile (like it really matters) and then played low from table.
It did not take me long to play the Ace.
This declarer has QT in his hand and if I played low, he could discard all losers in this suit to get an overtrick.
My respect for that declarer dropped several degrees.

Sometimes I wonder why they do it.
You will only gain from weak players, Naive me thinks everyone want to play well against real good players, instead of taking advantage from (almost) senior citizens like myself.
Feb. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ray,

The “back and forth” included 4C by East, 4D by West (both in uncertain tone) and a couple of “Oh, I am not sure”.

You said yourself, “the director's ruling should have been based on what each player said in private, not after joint discussion”.

So the talk at the table in front of us was both irrelevant and unnecessary.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The electronic play can be programmed to simulate the screen.
Your partner's bid is not displayed to you until RHO had done his bid.

Same can be programmed for cards played for each trick.

The issue is this may cause more delays.
But it can hide bidding/playing tempo from each player.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We all have seen this kind of “hitch” in club games all the time.
Most of them were innocent.

Once, I have Axxx in my hand and JT8 on the table.
When I played small to the table, LHO took a card out and then changed it back.
He finally won it with Queen.

He played another suit to get out and then I decided to finesse his partner (RHO) for King.
It turned out he had KQ doubleton.

I did not call director to try to adjust the score but I did report this after the game.
I asked the director to talk to the player and also asked her to keep a note just in case this behavior happens again.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
No, I would not be able to make something up with such specifics.
East said he could/might/would bid 4C, not 4D.
West then said he might respond 4D (which seems to be a forcing bid between them).

I heard these after the board is played and I still am not sure why the director came to our table after the board is played and check with them on this in front of us.
They could not determine how they were damaged at first.

I honestly did not hear takeout double was mentioned by either player.
However, I did not hear the private talks director had with them,
East could have suggested he might double in the private talk.
I do know East was not offered to change his bid (since he questioned the director why)
but West had the choice to change his last pass but he did not.
Feb. 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Players who, by experience or expertise, recognize that their opponents have neglected to Alert a special agreement will be expected to protect themselves.”

David, Thank you. Good point above.

I feel takeout X of 3S by East was not 100%, as you said.
I feel 3NT by West after the X was much less than likely. West has the option to pass the X.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, she did talk to them privately.

I do not understand why she had to talk to them together in front of us after the board is played either. Based on my limited understanding of the issue, that should have been clarified when they had the private talks.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“East's pass over 2♠ at the other table is very wrong.”

Yes, we did give a hard time to our teammates at the other table. :-)
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ray,

1. I simply reported what I had observed. I did not add or change anything that I saw first hand.
2. No one asked me anything except to confirm the 3S bid was weak and I forgot to alert.
3. The director did not tell me hoe she did the poll. Whether X by East was suggested.
4. It was not disclosed to me what East and West had said to the director privately before the play started.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
By OP, if you mean original poster, then I need to clarify I did not suggest that.
A non-expert like myself would have never considered 3NT on my own.
Even if East did takeout, as West I would pass and hope to collect 300.

It was the “director” who make the adjustment based on West's word that he would bid 3NT
(after considering some other bids).
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I made 3S with a favorable first lead.
And I believe I can limit it to -1 with a round suit lead.

If the rule was 3SX -1, you would not see this post from me.
Feb. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, the bidding were correct.
The key issue is the failure to alert 3S was weak.
East did not bid probably because he thought 3S was limit raise.
Feb. 11
1 2 3 4 5 6
.

Bottom Home Top