IAC where are you?

[onoway]

Thanks for your comments. Im not sure why you regard them as more fair? The problem with letting in the hordes, which we were doing for a while just so we could get full tourneys, is that there are lots and lots of problems with quitters, and some with rudeness. Even with a completion rate set at 90% at least one tourney had I think 12 runners. This slows things down a lot. Also, I had complaints that if it was supposed to be for IAC members how come all these other people were playing ( right after someone was really obnoxious before running away.) It also made it very time consuming to award Monster Points because often we had to sort through a bunch of nonmembers to get to the members to award their points.

Everything eventually gets to the point that it seems too much time is going into working at things that aren't paying off, if the members don't care enough to get involved...and NOT talking about you or the other regulars who have and do support us as much as they can..then why should we spend hours and hours trying to coax them? Note that I sent a message to nearly 900 members asking that they tell us why they want the club to continue, and have had only a handful of replies. Another handful have messaged me that they couldn't reply for one reason or another, and a few probably have language translation issues;  but for the other 800+..They can't  be bothered to be even that much involved.

[kenberg]

Bridge takes various forms. Yesterday yleexotee and I played maybe 16 hands, some  against helene_t and shatha, some against helene and dee10.

Now for me, this is bridge in the way I first learned it back in my grad student days. Four people got together, pulled out a deck of cards, and played for a while. A while means for a while. After a wile life got busy and I stopped playing altogether. Then, in my late thirties, I started playing at clubs and in tournaments.

What do people now like? It's hard to know if they don't say. I enjoyed the four person pick-up game. I couldn't make last light's tournament, we were at a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert. (I'm probably more the Pete Seeger type, or Duke Ellington if he could be re-incarnated, but Becky says she wants Free Bird played at her funeral.)

Anyway, I just enjoy playing some hands. When I was young I played Uncle Wiggly, Chinese Checkers, various rummy games. Later I played canasta, hearts and poker. Later I played bridge.  Playing bridge in an environment where I get to know people, even if only in an  internet sort of way, seems like a nice idea.

But if people are not interested, I have no good ideas on that.

[kenberg]

Last night I was watching some and Joe was encouraging opponents at his table to join IAC. A good idea I think. I will see if I can get my f2f partner to take an interest. Doubtful, but I will give it a shot.

Joe was advertising the pluses of IAC, one of which is that people tend to stick around for several hands  at a table unless there are non-bridge reasons that call them away. This is really agreat plus, imo. I played a few hands at Joe's table yesterday. "Few" because we all had reasons to go. But the first two hands I played I was partnered by a runner. She had a star by her name.  I'll give you the hands.


Hand 1.
http://tinyurl.com/y9obvase

After she pulled 3NT to 4   thought a bit and decided my had was actually pretty good support for a minor two-suiter. So rather than just bid 5 I chose 4 . We stopped in 5 . The right contract, as 6 goes down on a spade lead. Otoh, a spade might not be led. It wasn't, and then it makes 6. Also, Pard's major suit holding might have been two small hearts and no spades instead of one of each, and then it always makes 6 on a  3-2 trump  split. So my 4 is maybe a tad pushy but I did not think it crazy.


Hand 2.

http://tinyurl.com/ydfo4d9h

Ok, my spade overcall is not a thing of beauty. On the other hand, it is at the one level. On the other other hand,  we are vul.

Well, more than she could stand, I guess.  I hope she finds whatever it is she is seeking.

I am more than willing to discuss with a partner, or with opponents or kibs for that matter,  the wisdom of either my 4 cue bid on hand 1 or my 1 overcall on hand 2, but  this style of come for two hands, get one bad result, so fly away, is not fun. I don't expect Bob Hamman to partner me. I don't think she was Bob Hamman.

Anyway, IAC has its plusses. I wish us well with it.


Added: On the second hand the psychic Gib points out that I can hold it to down 1. Of course I can. But in thinking it over, it seems that if I play it properly I would be down 3. If diamonds are 3-3, as they are, and if the Q is onside, which it isn't, I have a shot at making this. Win the club Ace,  diamond to the board, diamond back to the J, hypothetically winning, cash the K throwing a club. Ruff a club, toss my last club on the heart Ace, and lead a spade from the board. They win, and they can't hurt me. With the actual lie, the  J loses to the Q, a club back to Bill's K, a shift to the spade Ten. This allows them to get my trump off the board and then take another club. Surely finessing the diamond is the most plausible line for making 4, it just doesn't work. I can't explain why I didn't do that.

[OliverC]

Hand 2

(1) The BiddingLeaving aside the play issues for a minute, I loathe this 1 overcall, especially at this vulnerability. I would much rather bid a Mod Ghestem 3!C showing a / 2-suiter, weak or strong. Partner will assume I'm weak (which essentially I am) and now we play quite happily in 3 (perhaps still off on your line, but at least partner is unlikely to complain about your overcall and might not flounce off in a big mood).


If Opps really end up playing this hand and Partner is on lead, do you really want to "hide" your Diamonds and persuade partner to lead a Spade given the horrendous quality of your suit? Okay, they might still lead a Spade, but only if it seems to them to be the right lead. Given their hand on this occasion, they'd probably lead their Ace of Diamonds so a happy ending for all concerned (except Opps).


(2) The Play
Difficult to see how Ace, King and a Diamond ruff is possibly going to help you, given that Opps have 5 of the top 6 Spades and Dummy doesn't have any of them. Since they have a perfect count on the Diamonds, it's always easy for the hand with long Spades to decline to ruff and for the hand with shorter Spades to do so. That is why the finesse ought to be preferred, because if the Diamonds are 3-3 and the Queen is onside, you do definitely save a trick, because the Club loser goes away immediately.


Your line only really gains anything if the hand with 3 (or more) trumps ruffs the 4th Diamond, something which competent defenders will always avoid, or if the Queen falls under the King and that defender has 3 or more Spades.

[kenberg]

I agree.

We need a button on these messages so that I could just say "I agree".   I have far to large a fraction of all the postings, so if I could just push a button it would keep my numbers down. 

But anyway, I agree both that 1 was a poor choice and that the play was very ill-conceived. As mentioned earlier, I like this concept of  "Mis-play these hands with me".

She still might have stuck around.  To borrow from an old Josh White blues, "I may be wrong, but I'll be right someday".  That was in a different context of course.