Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
IAC Teaching Sessions / Re: DARE TO DECLARE
« Last post by kenberg on Today at 02:22:57 PM »
So kind of you Ken, and many others that joined trny today. Please come all again next week!

It's tempting to play lesson hands "differently".  I think Kantar, in one of his many books, pointed out that "finesses never work in lesson hands". While that's close to true, it's not always true, and anyway it's a bad way to think.

There are similar issues.

I played boards 1 and 5 in the lesson. On board 1, after a little thought, 12 tricks can be claimed after trick 1. Yes, but not so on board 5. When I could not see the certain line to 12 tricks I got frustrated and then chose an inferior line. Of course not having a certain line is very realistic and I should have then looked for the best line instead of a certain line. I had to leave before the explanations got to board 5 but I guess I see it.  The spade finesse works (take that, Kantar!)  but you don't need it as long as you take reasonable care in handling the trump suit. The trump finesse also works, but it's against the odds and thus should not be taken. But it still makes.

The Angel hands are very good. I recommend them to anyone. Here is the point: When I first started playing bridge i would read the Kantar quizzes in the ACBL Bulletin and I would think "Sure, it works, but it would never occur to me". Then after a while, it at least sometimes would occur to me. And then, after a longer while, I would think "Good grief, of course I should have thought of that". And that is illustrated with hands 1 and 5 from these lessons. Hand 1 was something that I could see (almost) immediately, hand 5 was one of those "Good grief, I should have made it" hands.

I thank Arik for his efforts, and I really recommend the Dare series to everyone.


2
IAC Teaching Sessions / Re: DARE TO DECLARE
« Last post by Curls77 on January 21, 2019, 09:04:37 PM »
So kind of you Ken, and many others that joined trny today. Please come all again next week!
3
IAC Teaching Sessions / Re: DARE TO DECLARE
« Last post by kenberg on January 21, 2019, 04:33:29 PM »
Good you posted. I am going out but I will make a strong effort to be back in time and then I will play. Good luck in keeping it alive.

Ken
4
IAC Teaching Sessions / DARE TO DECLARE
« Last post by Curls77 on January 20, 2019, 02:51:16 PM »
Every teacher spends lots of time and patience to give us their free lessons. Least we ought to do is respect their gift and thank them by nice attendance. Angel Blue is making extra effort, and stays up late, only so the lesson could be followed by America's members.
From now on, unless we start Monday DARE TO DECLARE trny with 8+ tables, all event, ie both trny and review, will be cancelled. So please do join, do not prevent fellow members from excellent opportunity to improve their declarer play.

Last week, Jan 14 we played hands u can find attached to this post, and Arik's notes are at: http://angelblue.co.il/iac-36/ .

5
IAC Matters / Re: PROFILES
« Last post by Curls77 on January 19, 2019, 09:22:17 PM »
Absolutely agreed there Donna :) But we all can ignore IAC site for teams and ladders, they stopped working. Hopefully Joe, Todd and Walid, and maybe Douglas will soon put outside solution for that.
More on profiles.. BBO profiles all people should also review and update. And stop playing games as setting themselves as Novice, teachers find no fun it those jokes.
6
IAC Teaching Sessions / Marc Smith - Planning in Defence Session Notes
« Last post by bAbsG on January 19, 2019, 05:10:50 AM »
Hey IACers

Marc Smith has provided us with the notes for the Friday, January 18 session on "Planning in Defence".  Please review the notes at your leisure and if you have any questions, or are interested in reasonably priced lessons, feel free contact Marc at marc@bridge-teacher.com





7
IAC Matters / PROFILES
« Last post by donnas on January 16, 2019, 03:55:17 PM »
I just looked at my profile, and discovered that I had not updated it in a very long time.  I was listed as an Intermediate who preferred SAYC.  I have been playing 2/1  (and have been Advanced) for several years.  I am also listed as a member of a team that has not existed for a long time.  I wonder how many people have undated their profiles?  May I suggest that everyone take a few minutes to make sure that the information is correct.
8
2/1 Talk / Re: Master Solvers Club
« Last post by jcreech on January 10, 2019, 08:32:41 PM »
SOLUTIONS FOR:
James Creech
Gen Allen VA
U.S.A.

PROBLEM A: Pass              100
PROBLEM B: 4 Notrump       90
PROBLEM C: Pass                50
PROBLEM D: Double          100
PROBLEM E: 1 Notrump       70
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump       70
PROBLEM G: 3 Hearts          40
PROBLEM H: Spade 10         60

Total 580

I think the only complete surprise to me was Problem G,  Its not that I didn't think of 4SF, it's just that I didn't think this hand justified forcing to game.  A sixth !H, Kx in both of partner's suits are pluses, but it only has 11 HCPs, the !H suit is hardly robust, and fitting cards do not constitute a fit.  I still feel that this hand is highly invitational.  In fact, I find it insulting to see that the more aggressive 3 !H is scored lower than the two underbids of 2 !H and 1 NT, when the top score goes to an even more aggressive artificial game force.  I expected more of link between the valuation of the hand and the scores assigned.  But i guess if you are looking for logic in scoring answers on bridge questions, you should not look to the MSC directors.
9
2/1 Talk / Re: Master Solvers Club
« Last post by Masse24 on January 10, 2019, 06:45:02 PM »
Nothing so bizarre that it did not occur to me.


PROBLEM A: 4 Clubs                50
PROBLEM B: 4 Diamonds        100
PROBLEM C: 1 Notrump          100
PROBLEM D: Double               100
PROBLEM E: 1 Diamond          100
PROBLEM F: 2 Notrump            70
PROBLEM G: 3 Hearts               40
PROBLEM H: Diamond Queen  100
            
                               Total       660

Mildly peeved I changed my answer on "A".
I understand 2 !D on "F" but still prefer 2NT for the reasons stated upthread.
I contemplated the GF 2 !C on "G" (a mild overbid) thinking that the room it saved (to sort out strain) relative to the 3 !H choice offset the fact it was an overbid. But I dismissed it. I'm guessing that will be the logic behind it. I'll add that, if the GF 2 !C scores 100, then why does the meek 2 !H score better than 3 !H???

On to next month.

10
2/1 Talk / Re: Master Solvers Club
« Last post by kenberg on January 10, 2019, 01:54:48 PM »
Oh my, today is the 10th and it's ten to nine. I could claim I have been busy, there is some truth in that, but not that busy. Anyway I'll try to get to this even if it's too late to send it in to BWS. Or maybe I'll just do next month's and forget this month's. That sounds better.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10