Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2020 March - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB
« Last post by Masse24 on Yesterday at 08:16:25 PM »
PROBLEM B: 3NT. In my opinion, this is a hand valuation problem. How strong am I?

Although BWS2017 does not provide detailed information as to its preferred method of follow-ups employing 3NT as a “mild slam try,” it does provide this explanation:

Mild and Serious Slam-Tries: When an eight-plus-card major-suit fit has been established, neither partner has made a natural two-notrump bid, and the auction is forcing to game, a nonjump bid of three notrump is a mild slam-try, and a control-bid or a long-suit indicator is a strong slam-try.”

One advantage of using either Serious 3NT or Frivolous 3NT is having the ability to show a hand that is more than a complete garbage minimum, but less than a hand with the extras necessary to make a hard drive to slam. A hand that a "fast arrival" jump (which I abhor) might lose.

Like this hand.

We have a double fit. My trumps are great. Partner has four or fewer cards in the minors, so I’ll have little in the way of wasted values. But I’m flat. And I hate my xxx in spades. All of that together looks like a hand willing to cooperate in a slam move if partner has extras. But I want to send the message that I do not have the “stuff” to make the move myself.

3NT accomplishes this.
2
Sleight of Hand / Re: Neat hand
« Last post by jcreech on January 22, 2020, 10:00:45 PM »
It cannot be made without defensive help.  The way it can be made is via a trump coup, but there are not enough entries to pull it off by declarer play alone.  There simply are not enough entries.  However, the defense may try to tap declarer, and that is where the defense gets it wrong.  Easy mistake to make.
3
Sleight of Hand / Neat hand
« Last post by Curls77 on January 22, 2020, 09:39:02 PM »
Shawn saw this hand played in IAC and mailed me as a very neat one :) I ofc would never make it, but surely our IAC musketeers and other that participate here would have ideas!
                   A
                   AKQ8752
                   72
                   T87

KJ95732                         Q
6                                   94
AQ4                               KT953
K4                                 QJ652

                  T864
                  JT3
                  J86
                  A93

NS vulnerable, S opens and pass.
(P) 1S (4H) P
(P) 4S all pass
Lead hA

How you make your 4S as west?
4
IAC Tourneys / Re: Managing incompleted hands
« Last post by Curls77 on January 22, 2020, 09:08:48 PM »
I agree with all you said :)
In Dare, and Poco Problems, I follow Arik's, a round has just 1 board (not because of time, but to be able remind them of next contract timely), and is set to 10 mins, which i always increase if it is needed, bottom line in such trnys is not rush - take ur time and think. Very few complained about it.
7 mins per board in trny with random hands usually works just fine.
So my only problem is when in normal, random trny, 14 mins per round they call TD in 12th minute coz 2nd board is just being bid and wont be able to finish. Tough luck! They gotta call us earlier, whatever the reason of delay is, or we will be forced leave AVE, which is not always fair, and should be avoided if possible.

My particular bugbear is people who blithely return after a period of non-responsiveness with 'Sorry, phone'. You wouldn't take a phone call when playing f2f, so why do it playing online? Isnt that what voicemail is for?
Mine too! It's disrespectful to pard, opps, td and all in trny.
5
IAC Teaching Sessions / phil's lesson on youtube
« Last post by kenberg on January 22, 2020, 08:51:59 PM »
There was a message posted about Phil's lesson. This was in the usual mail messages you get when logging in to bbo.  I had trouble getting it to link but I eventually succeeded. I was thinking it might be easier from  a forum posting.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sH0pIpInIFs
6
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2020 March - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB
« Last post by jcreech on January 22, 2020, 02:48:26 PM »
Initial thoughts - this is a bit early for me, but took a little time to run through the problems:

Problem A:  3C  - Speak of the proverbial 50 point deck, this seems to be one of those.  I don’t like keeping secrets from partner and we have a nine-card fit, so I cue bid to let partner know we have a fit and I have values (and most of them should be working).  Partner’s hand has a flaw that kept him from making a takeout double – either too short in hearts or spades.  The next round of bidding should help clear things up.

Problem B:  3NT – I’m not absolutely sure I want to go slamming, but not sure that I don’t either, so a mild slam try seems reasonable.  If partner has a club control to cue, then I cooperate one more time, after that, it is up to partner to continue.

Problem C:  2C – Partner’s expected heart bid puts me in a bind that I should have anticipated.  All of my options are bad so this is a least lie situation.  I don’t think this is right for a Moysian, so 1S is out, I don’t like bidding an immediate 1NT with a singleton in partner’s suit, not enough points to reverse and not enough hearts to raise – guess what that leaves?  The club suit is robust enough for me to rebid and pretend there are six.

Problem D:  2C – Research what BWS considers 2C followed by 3C.  What I need is an invitational sequence.  I am too good for a preempt and not good enough for a game force.  If 2C followed by 3C is not right then I will be stuck with a less than satisfactory 1NT, to show my stopper and slightly underbid my values.

Problem E:  1NT – With this shape and a better suit, I like to overcall in spades, and reopen with a double.  With 16 HCPs and a double stop in diamonds, I’ll just show everything except the 5th spade with 1NT.

Problem F:  4S – This hand is right for a Moysian, though I am a bit worried about a bad break in the spade suit.  The advantage is that this bid keeps us one level lower, but a minor may be a better strain.  I’m going to gamble on the Moysian, and if doubled, run to 4NT to ask for partner’s better minor.  My second choice is 4NT immediately and my third is to pass and hope we have four defensive tricks.   

Problem G:  (b6) – I am torn between opening 2NT  and opening 1D and rebidding 3NT.  2NT does a better job of conveying the HCPs – 19 + an upgrade for the diamond length.  However, opening the suit and rebidding 3NT may do a better job of describing the playing strength and defensive concerns when owning a long solid suit.  Right now, I am going with the playing strength, but may decide that it also undervalues the HCPs before I actually vote.

Problem H:  H6 – I have entries, so despite having four hearts in dummy,  this may be our best suit to attack.  I am hoping that the 10 is not in dummy and partner has Hx.  Although I have not seen dummy yet, there is potential room for something useful in partner’s hand.
7
IAC Tourneys / Re: Managing incompleted hands
« Last post by kenberg on January 22, 2020, 01:07:00 PM »
Just a note in support of the above. Yesterday's tourney started at 2 est, I was expecting a call that could not be missed a bit after 3, I thought about it and decided no. In fact the "bit after 3" became 3:45 so I could have played but it was essential that I take it and so I skipped the session. Other times, with less essential calls, Becky (my wife) can deal with them or, as suggested, I can just let it roll over to voice mail. Or I might pick it up and say that I will call them back in, say, half an hour.

The unexpected sometimes happens and I am fine with being understanding about the unexpected. But, with the occasional exception,  we do need to keep pace in a timed game.

Some hands are just difficult.  On these, we can hope everyone can reach some sort of accommodation.  When Arik runs the Dare hands he regularly urges people to slow down and think through the hands. Of course lesson hands are different, or sort of different, from random hands. I say sort of different because often the lesson hands are taken from actual play and because whatever the particular lesson for the hand was, another part of the lesson was to think before playing.  There is a limit on the thinking time, but if the idea is to get people to think through the hand before playing, then this thinking will take some time. More time for some hands than for others.

Maybe the purpose of lesson hands could be summed up as: There is more to bridge than just taking every finesse in sight. We need time to appreciate complexity, but not unlimited time. We should clear our desks so that the time really is on the hands, and sometimes we will have a complicated hand that we just have to play as best we can for now and come back to later for more thought. We can't take forever, but this is a thinking game.
8
IAC Tourneys / Re: Managing incompleted hands
« Last post by ian84 on January 22, 2020, 11:29:37 AM »
As a general rule we set random board IAC tourneys to be 7 mins per board and I have found this to work well for most of the time.  We are blessed with a supportive membership who regularly and promptly respond to calls for subs via the BBO_IAC club broadcasts.

To my mind, the major problems leading to incompletion are players experiencing connection problems, or being distracted at home. My particular bugbear is people who blithely return after a period of non-responsiveness with 'Sorry, phone'. You wouldn't take a phone call when playing f2f, so why do it playing online? Isnt that what voicemail is for?

In the case of connection issues, it seems to me that the other players are very reticent to call out slow play or non-responsivenes until its too late. As noted by Jim, this is a particular problem when its 2 boards per round - I can usually check progress and warn people of slow play in good time on my 4-bd per round Sunday tourney.

So I think that engaging the membership further on these issues may be helpful.
9
IAC & Master Solvers Club / Re: 2020 March - MASTER SOLVERS CLUB
« Last post by blubayou on January 22, 2020, 05:06:20 AM »

PROBLEM A :>>     East hasn't a prayer of having a 2-level free-bid,  so he will pass when raised.   If opener puts him in game when I pass,  and [surprise]  it is makeable,  are we going to save red vs. not?   That's 500  folks.This looks like 9 for each side to me  quite often, so I let sleeping dogs lie,  not even trying to eke out the 1 IMP  for 4 diamonds -100.       ---  PASS now,  and sell out to 3 hearts, also.

PROBLEM B: >>  The first step here is to realize  that this is a mere opening hand after all.  The second  is to research BWS agreements about what a LEAP TO 4 HEARTS would have meant.  (Is it some kind of "picture bid", or is it "Drop-dead unless you have all the goodies").  But given all that I am making the hinted-at mild slam try of 3NT -- because of the top cards and great hearts.  i fantasize pard's4 club cue, so i can get the diamond ace of my chest  then let 4H  alone  if that comes next.  May Brigita have mercy on my soul.    -------3NT


PROBLEM C:>>  This problem  made me recall the habit of the Big Gun  panelists  of the 50s--70s  to ABSTAIN  when they simply could not swallow the bidding dictated to them  ie: opening one club. But that time is gone   along with the dream-auction of  "1D, 1H; 2C, 2D; 2NT".    LETS avoid the distortion of both size and shape in a 1NT rebid,  and try another one of those cute 3-card 1 spade rebid.                        ------ 1S    (scoring 30 this month)
10
IAC Tourneys / Re: Managing incompleted hands
« Last post by kenberg on January 21, 2020, 06:33:24 PM »
Fact is that longer the round bigger the wait. From time stamps i see that first pair finished 4boards round at 19:32, and last at 19:46. That's 14 mins wait for many tables, and it is way too much imho. We risk people wander away and will need subs for next round.

I hope for some caution here. A reasonable pace should be expected, but this does not mean that when one pair plays really fast everyone else should be expected to keep pace. Even if the fast pair can play really well at this fast pace, it would not be suitable for everyone.

As with most things, balance is desirable. Let's say Jim's suggestion is reasonable, 8 minutes a  board. So 32 minutes for a four board round. Call it 30 if you like, a nice round number. Suppose one pair finishes in 20 minutes. That should not obligate the rest of us to rush through our play.

Crazy eights is a fun game, or so I recall from childhood, and it is played really fast. Bridge is different.  A decent pace is expected, but it is not a race.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10