Vilgan

Vilgan 50 Oyoleo 9 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:90b98481.9095.11e7.8113.0cc47a39aeb4-1504435771&u=vilgan

I'm in. Out of curiosity, why imps again instead of matchpoints?

Is there any way to get notified for the next challenge event? Or do we just need to keep checking the events forum?

4th Set Vilgan vs Chuck11 45 - 2 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:3af95047.5602.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1497995323&u=Vilgan Summary of all 4: Vilgan vs Chuck11 15 - 32 9 - 7 22 - 14 45 - 2 Total: 91 to 55 Was a great match. I was losing up until the last set when everything seemed to go my way.

3rd set Vilgan vs Chuck11 22 - 14 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:68005e68.55f1.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1497988097&u=Vilgan

2nd set Vilgan vs Chuck11 9 - 7 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:e3b0ed17.55ce.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1497973272&u=Vilgan

1st segment Chuck11 over Vilgan 32 to 15 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ce2f5d4c.54a2.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1497844387&u=Vilgan

I switched to rusinow with all willing partners, so K from AK is just part of that. I've been surprised at how nice it is to resolve the ambiguity, leading unsupported aces in certain situations comes up a lot more than I would have expected.

I would like to play. I am new to this, here because Phil mentioned it on BW

Hi all, I did some bidding practice w/ a partner for KC and we wrote down the #s of boards we wanted to discuss further after the fact. However, they apparently aren't included in the hands in the "Hands Records" section. I'm likewise not seeing how to pull them up when logged in. Is there any way to view them after the fact? Or did I lose all record of what the cards were? Thanks for any help w/ this!

My assumption is that this is real. They had a great April Fools system previously, letting people create articles and tag it April Fools and this isn't at all funny (imo). The ability to get there via https is likely an oversight when implementing the injunction if they only forwarded port 80 but not 443.

Given the fact partner doubled 2x and I've got an A to help out I doubt they are making 4♥. The main issue (imo) is should we bid, and w/ 4♠ and a singleton heart, I think its worth it but its not good enough to go up a level and bid diamonds or 4NT w/ the first hand.

Last national I went to, I checked my phone as per the rules, and the person handling phones decided to just leave before all the events concluded. I then got to experience the joy of trying to find friends I was supposed to meet up for dinner by wandering around the hotel for 45 minutes looking. The next day (day 2 of the Vanderbilt) we were discussing the phone mess with our opponents (both famous bridge players) and they both just chuckled and pulled out their phones from their pockets to display what they thought of the ridiculous phone policy and put them back in their pockets. I still check my phone for the finals of a major event, but don't bother for prelim stuff (altho I do double check to make sure the phone is off) and it seems like a lot of other people treat it the same way.

I dislike squeezes where I need to guess who has what at the end, as its usually not very useful at higher levels (or my ability to read top players is not good enough). I'd probably put the K of hearts with S and then just go for the simple squeeze. This also has the advantage of working when clubs are 3/3 as long as S did have the K :P win 2nd spade, cross to dummy, run the Q (hopefully its covered) then go for the simple squeeze.

99% would treat 4NT there as RKC for clubs? I doubt that. Many B/C certainly would but not even 99% of them would treat it as RKC let alone higher level players. As for the bidding, pretty clear that 3♥ was terrible here. It seems like W has no clue how to show strength bidding 2/1, maybe they should learn precision?

Some sort of way to bid ♥/♦ naturally seems nice. That aside, just thumping out 6♣ doesn't seem like a terrible call. Lots of things you need to find out like partner shape, major suits Qs, etc to determine the correct level (5/6/7) that I'm not sure is very doable here.

As one of the younger generation referred to in this post, a few comments: I have no interest in ever playing bridge in a completely electronic fashion. Do I enjoy BBO? Sure, for the convenience factor. Its a great place to get a game without travel or waiting, and I think its a great place to practice with people. I (personally) don't have much respect for "online tournaments" however because it doesn't feel like real bridge to me. If the ACBL switched to an all online model, I would stop playing bridge. The idea of driving to a club and then using electronic devices instead of cards similarly repels me. I want to play a card game. If I wanted to play an electronic game, I could play dozens such games from home that are going to be a lot more involving than bridge. I would like to see a lot of stuff involving scoring/dealing simplified via electronics, but the instant we switch from real cards to devices bridge loses its appeal imo. Looking at poker which has dealt with this more than bridge: My girlfriend's brother is a professional poker player. He makes most of his money playing online instead of in person. However, he FAR prefers in person and only does the online stuff because it is easier to take care of his kid while he does it. Probably 90% of his poker playing is done online but the 10% in person is the part he really enjoys while the online stuff he sees as a grind to make a living. I personally see the evolution of bridge being the electronic form becoming more and more like F2F rather than F2F becoming more like BBO. 50-100 years from now maybe we will meet in holographic form, deal the cards, and sit around the virtual table similarly to how we do at clubs, but from the convenience of our own home. Until that time though, I can think of no better way to kill the game off than to make it yet another video game. It will not be able to compete in that arena.

dislike my lead is fine. I'd personally play the diamonds in this order: 4, 2, 9. partner has the points and needs to know if you have a long club suit (which you don't) or if they should switch. If they have clubs of their own, they are going to know to continue the suit regardless given that they should have all the entries.

Most likely layout would be short hearts w/ LHO, but I don't think its makeable then. Some other less likely layouts but might be possible could be: QTxxxx KQx xx xx or QTxxxx KQx x Jxx Play for 2nd hand might go something like: A of hearts, club Q (covered), club ruff, heart ruff, club ruff, diamond ace, heart ruff, 2 more rounds of trump(pitching spades), *club T, spade to A, J of hearts. They ruff the K of spades w/ last trump but it doesn't matter. If LHO pitches a spade on 3rd club aka first hand (and didn't drop J), then it switches at * to: spade to A, J of hearts, K of spades, 5th heart making 7 I think. If he pitches Q of hearts, then route to 12 should still be pretty easy since you can afford to ruff 3rd heart high. Kind of just threw this together so plz point out if I'm missing something obvious :P

Easy 1♠ for me. Colors reversed, 2♠ might be worth considering. Not so when its w/r.

Many of the club games near where I live get around all this hubbub by just making the games invitational and disallowing "good" players from playing with each other. Its obviously preferred by most of the membership, as they are by far the largest games around.

What are pros/cons of: Requiring a spade lead from LHO vs Spreading my hand as dummy Seems like my shape is pretty well known. Might as well make my hand the exposed hand.

I used to play coded 9s/10s. I found it to be only be decent against declarers who don't bother to check if its coded. As a declarer I also found myself LOVING IT when other people played coded 9s/10s. I'd say its a decent policy at lower levels when people don't look, but detrimental against better declarers who will always ask/check if its coded.

X If partner bids spades, I will raise. Will probably be a moysian, but should be a strong moysian. Its also very unlikely I'll get a crazy break in spades (4-2 at worst) whereas I could get a very bad club break. If partner bids 4♣ or 4♦ I'll sign off in 5♣. If partner passes (unlikely) that'll be fine too. While slam is a possibility, I don't see a good way to explore for it in a safe way. Simply bidding 3NT was my first thought, but thinking about hands it seems like most hands that can make 3NT will make 5♣, and some that don't might still make 5♣.

Edit> nm, see below. I don't think suitplay will consider it, but Q is actually better in the given contract because KTxxx onside can still make 6♦ IF RHO only has 2 clubs.