Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - hoki

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
31
The IAC Café / Re: Di stories - let's introduce ourselves :)
« on: November 09, 2021, 07:36:53 PM »
Oliver:

Phase I: Born and educated in Auckland, New Zealand, I was around the
age of 13 when I learned bridge – the easy way, watching my parents play
socially at home. They even joined the local club but they chiefly played
with a young couple where I would watch while doing my homework
and listening to pop music. Then when that couple moved out of the
city my brother had to make up the foursome. By the time he left home
he’d had enough of cards and never played bridge again but did become
a formidable chess opponent.

Phase II: At university we all assembled in the common room  to play
bridge between lectures with quite a few extending their play time
into the lecture sessions. Quite a number of those former students are
now still regulars on the local tournament circuit. I’m not sure or whether
the bidding followed any particular system or what we played was just
called “common room bridge”. I had one partner with whom I occasionally
played at the local club. As youngsters we were tolerated although we
were the only ones there not wearing a suit and tie.

Phase III: After completing my studies I couldn’t wait to visit the land
my parents had escaped from when the Nazis took over in Germany and
Europe. A planned two-year OE (overseas experience) trip turned into
20 years, with bridge featuring only briefly at the beginning and then a
tad longer at the end. German bridge clubs lacked the same relaxed and
friendly atmosphere that our local clubs here do too and it wasn’t until
I got a look into the games run by the US forces stationed in Berlin and
other parts of Germany that I took the game up again. Already at that
time I encountered the “forcing notrump” convention which went under
the name of “Eastern Scientific”.

Phase IV: At the end of the 70s I spent almost three years working at a
university computer centre in Nigeria and the only bridge I encountered
there, and that only sporadically, was at the officers wives club where
the members knew better than the international luminaries and ruled
that to make the game “fairer” overtricks should only be counted at half
their nominal value.

Phase V: Back in Berlin I sat the certified director test and staffed at
the four or five annual ACBL-sanctioned Sectionals run by the EAFBL
(European Armed Forces Bridge League) and even the first couple of
ACBL Regionals that were held in Wiesbaden at that time. I sorely miss
the great camaraderie of those days as I also miss the directing and the
manual scoring.

Phase VI: The attraction of online bridge hit me towards the end of the 90s,
first of all with OKBridge and then from about 2004 with BridgeBase.  It was
good to meet friends from OKB later on BBO as well. On the latter site I early
became a mentor in both the BIL (Beginner Intermediate Lounge) and the
IAC (Intermediate Advanced Club). Around that time I quit paid employment
as a polytechnic tutor in computer subjects and because I missed the teaching
and the interaction with students I took on quite a heavy commitment on BBO,
running one or two sessions every week. Over the years my dedication to online
bridge teaching gradually diminished as more and more other projects grew in
interest for me … from writing and editing material for websites on Holocaust
education to local control of invasive weed species (moth plant, woolly
nightshade) – and every¬thing in-between.

(Edited by Curls77 - we can not promote different bridge platforms, IAC is BBO club. Many lessons on BBO use ZOOM as helping tool, but there is also BBO Video Chat for those that like having more social touch, altho whenever we used it, very few players adhered).

32
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 DECEMBER MSC
« on: November 06, 2021, 06:15:52 AM »
Thank you.  :D

33
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 DECEMBER MSC
« on: October 24, 2021, 04:22:09 AM »
As usual I prefer to go for all the simple options, eschewing extrapolated
projections or complex conventions (who needs lebensohl?):
A - (a2) {1D - 2C }  the smallest and hopefully least expensive lie;
B - 3NT, no guarantee that partner holds two aces for 6C to be gin;
C - 3C, sure a bit extra but pard can still bid again - I don't believe in hanging an enterprising balancing bidder;
D - 2S, discounting my heart values - failing to support pard erodes partnership trust;
E - dble, the void must be worth heaps if pard chooses to bid any number of spades;
F - 3NT, but no strong feelings on this one;
G - 2D, as I said I'm a simple soul;
H - H6

34
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 NOVEMBER MSC
« on: September 29, 2021, 12:11:37 PM »
A - need to be convinced that 2♠ shows five spades, why not play in a Moysian major rather than a 4-4 minor?

B - 3NT, without a fit (3♣ might be a fragment) I'm not interested in slam, but if I had to make a second choice it would be
3♠, not 3

C - 3NT, why not with a balanced minimum?

D - 3 to show a solid suit

E - 3 absolutely stuck on this one, but I can't bring myself to bid 3NT with no sure club stopper

F - 2, a "normal" (haha - nothing's normal in these problems) limit raise

G - 3♠ (and 4 if it comes back to me); I fear the hand is not good enough to force to game via 4♣

H - ♠A, only easy problem in the set?

35
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: MISSING OCTOBER 2021 MSC
« on: August 27, 2021, 05:25:56 AM »
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades
PROBLEM B: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM C: Double
PROBLEM D: 5 Diamonds
PROBLEM E: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM F: 4 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM H: Diamond King

36
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: Sept 2021 MSC
« on: July 24, 2021, 05:43:43 AM »
A   5♣, but can live with 4
B   2NT, the problem comes next round
C   2 – double risks missing a 5-3 heart fit
D   3 – but at the table I’d probably bid an impulsive 5♣
E   3♠ – it’s where my hand lives and if it’s a misfit this is high enough
F   5♣ – the suit disparity speaks against 4NT
G   4♠ – I don’t expect pard to be void in spades when competing in a minor
H   ♠10

37
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 AUGUST MSC
« on: June 30, 2021, 06:50:02 AM »
PROBLEM A: 4 Spades
PROBLEM B: 4 Clubs
PROBLEM C: 1 Spade
PROBLEM D: (a1) | (b1)
PROBLEM E: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM F: 3 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: Double
PROBLEM H: Diamond 10

38
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 AUGUST MSC
« on: June 16, 2021, 07:45:58 AM »
A  I'm with the school that sees 4♣ as a slam try, so 4 is a control bid. With a weak hand pard could just bid 3♠.

B  It's IMPs, so even in a long match I would not like facing team mates with a score of minus 670. 3 or 3 will do me since I don't believe in hanging partner for wishing to compete.

C  1♠.

D  Pass ... and Pass.

E  Agree with the abstainers - it's a clear double on the first round. No choice now but 2♣. 

F  3.

G  Dble.

H  10.

39
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
« on: April 26, 2021, 04:50:29 AM »
PROBLEM A: 2 Spades - non-forcing constructive, implies at least club tolerance
PROBLEM B: Double - even though I passed on my previous turn this must surely be take-out
PROBLEM C: Pass - a pure guess, but no guarantee at all that we can make nine tricks in clubs
PROBLEM D: (a) - arguably the most descriptive option
PROBLEM E: Pass - tough, as discussed within the confines of the BW system
PROBLEM F: 3 Hearts - an overbid but hard to pass
PROBLEM G: Pass - maybe they got lucky (?), don't want to hang partner for balancing
PROBLEM H: Club Ace

40
I'd be in BUT I detest that the times are not given in GMT or UTC. Duh, is all I can say.

Also, I could accept paying five BBO$ - no problem - but for a team captain to pay $20
and then try and retrieve $5 privately from three other players seems like a rather
daunting and unforgiving task. PayPal, the best method, is likely to charge another
$3 (??) administration fee, which sucks.

Oliver

41
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
« on: April 24, 2021, 09:06:44 PM »
Thanks Jim and Jock, you have certainly given me food for thought.

42
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 JUNE MSC
« on: April 23, 2021, 10:24:56 PM »
E Can someone please answer these three queries:

1/ Why are we responding 1H instead of bidding four-card suits up the line with 1D?
My understanding is that we bypass [longer] diamonds on hands that are not strong
enough to force to game?

2/ Why are we bidding a non-forcing 2D after opener's hand is clearly limited by the
2C rebid? Isn't our correct rebid 3D? (Had I sensibly responded 1D in the first place
I could of course now bid 2H which would indeed be forcing and not result in partner
raising hearts on a doubleton.)

3/ How am I supposed to bid sensibly over 2S when I have already totally misdescribed
my hand?

Oliver

43
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2201 MAY MSC
« on: March 29, 2021, 11:00:02 AM »
PROBLEM A: 3 Spades, influenced by comments on this forum
PROBLEM B: 5 Clubs, if it fails it will go down less than 3NT
PROBLEM C: 1 Spade, hate to lose the spade suit which all other actions risk doing
PROBLEM D: (b), but maybe influenced by the knowledge that partner will bid 2♠ over double
PROBLEM E: 4 Clubs, 3NT gives up on slam
PROBLEM F: 2 Clubs, about as natural as we can get
PROBLEM G: 3 Spades, but I would play double as responsive which would handle this situation perfectly
PROBLEM H: Heart Queen, like Todd says what do I know about leads?

44
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2021 April MSC
« on: March 07, 2021, 03:37:20 AM »
PROBLEM A: 3. Partner’s most likely hand imvho has five cards in one of the majors and ten points – so I rejected my first choice of a very aggressive 3NT and went low. Plus 100 from 3♣ doubled is going to lose against plus 140 in three of a major and that’s what we need to win the board.

PROBLEM B: Yes, 4♣ initially and didn’t change it since partner can always retreat to diamonds.

PROBLEM C: 3NT – since I do have two stoppers in clubs. Many advocate passing but plus 200, even plus 500, is not as good as plus 600. And partner’s double is in the direct seat, not the balancing seat.

PROBLEM D: 2♣ gets both suits into play; 2 was my first choice but that would only be “right” if I were to come in with 3♣ next round – but if partner can’t do more than bid 2♠ I don’t want to go any higher.

PROBLEM E: Pass. Let’s hear what partner’s cue bid was based on – and if we hear a heart or club bid we can still move towards slam. Pass and then 4 (if partner redoubles) is stronger than an immediate 4.

PROBLEM F: Yes / 5. Tough – my inclination was to bid 6 but the discussion on this thread encouraged me to go low rather than high, but have no logical explanation for that.

PROBLEM G: 3♠. The problem I see with 2♣ is that we may well be playing there is partner has five clubs and K-x of spades with only a minimum hand.

PROBLEM H: I’m dithering between the “standard” ♣10 and the 4 – but never the A which asks partner to unblock from K-x.

45
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2020 December - MASTER SOLVER'S CLUB
« on: November 08, 2020, 06:29:11 PM »
PROBLEM A: Pass
PROBLEM B: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM C: 2 Notrump
PROBLEM D: 2 Clubs
PROBLEM E: 1 Heart
PROBLEM F: 2 Diamonds
PROBLEM G: 3 Clubs
PROBLEM H: Club Jack

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5