nikos59

Hello Julie Pierre Albarran was born in 1894 and died in 1960. Most of his contemporaries are not alive today, obviously, but people who knew him are alive and well and I could suggest to try Jean Paul Meyer, the French expert and journalist. He is a member of BBO and his nickname is "lebridgeur" if I remember correctly (if this is protected personal data, the moderators may hide it). During big Vugraph shows, J-P may be seen among the spectators or commentators, although not so often. Some books of Albarran are still available, perhaps second-hand, eg here: http://www.galaxidion.com/home/catalogues....sortOrder=alpha A short biography of Albarran in Italian is here: http://www.infobridge.it/Campioni_Albarran.htm Leon Tintner, now at his 90s, is still active in bridge -if you get in touch he will probably enlighten you. In France, the name of Albarran is still very much heard in clubs. "We are playing 2C Albarran" players announce, meaning game force with ace responses. Members of the Albarran team in the 30s, besides Baron de Nexon and Rousset were two young Greeks, Touloumaris and Sophocles Venizelos who later was to become Prime Minister of Greece. Here is a Chinese page with a hand played by Albarran http://bridge.ustc.edu.cn/yjjd/06_13.htm Unfortunately the narrative is in Chinese, so I cannot check the accuracy of the facts :) Hope this may help Nikos

Indeed, 1H -what else? nikos

One hand obviously shows nothing, but I am glad that the "bid once more in freak deals" principle was proved right for the umpteenth time :ph34r:) nikos

Pass on the first round -I like to overcall more than the average person but this suit is not at all attractive. Pass now as well. Don't like it but I can live with it. n

To jtfanclub: You say that pard has said "I don't think we have slam" but I fail to see which of his calls or bids conveyed this particular message. The 5H bid perhaps? If yes, then I admire you for your listening skills. Anyway, I stand by my opinion, waiting to see the hands. I am willing to sacrifice the difference from +100 to -100 in order to avoid -1210 or to avoid missing +1510. The good thing that may be said for passing is that partner will have the privilege to make the opening lead that may swing a couple of dozens of imps. n

The fact that partner doubled is almost irrelevant. I have not shown my hand and I don't expect him to have a trump stack in spades either. Odds are that both 6S and 7H will fail but if one makes then the impact, both score-wise and psychological will be huge against the erring side. Hence, I take insurance by bidding 7H. If they go to 7S (not unlikely) I will double this trusting that partner will not convert to 7NT or 8H. Moreover, if (this is admittedly thin) both 6S and 7H make, by bidding 7H one ensures that he will be on the winning side of a cherished story. Hence, 7H -especially since this is the first board. nikos

I wouldn't have opened. Now I pass, hoping for 200. If they make it, I'll try to win the post-mortem. nikos

I now answer with the huge benefit of hindsight, but I wouldn't bid 4H, merely 3. I usually bid 4 with five trumps but this hand seemed unattractive, also the lack of spade raise. nikos

Well, I would probably bid 1S over the Sputnik. Either this or 5D, although 3nt also has some merit. But now, I guess your psyche struck well and they have 8hearts between them (or 9: where are the hearts?) That said, perhaps they had 4H down 1. Anyway, I now pass and wait eagerly for dummy. nikos

Today I am playing with a charming lady from Paris as a partner, opponents are a fellow Greek and a German guy, both experts. The lady has been known to make an error, but is charming regardless. We play some boards, they are tough, then the Greek goes and comes a star player from Norway -but the system has some problems and he gets disconnected and leaves, then comes an American guy, very nice and all, and quite generous as defender if you get what I mean. After some 10 boards while we are some 30 imps in front, the American guy announces that this board would be his last. First to speak, NV ag V, I hold: Q10642 A754 QJ4 5 Now, as you see, the 10 is wider than the other pips, so the spade suit takes much more space than the hearts, so I imagine I have six spades. I firmly believe that an 6-4 in the majors has to be opened, so I open 2S. Partner has a 15-point balanced hand with KJx in spades but without aces. So she blasts 3NT which makes. (4S also may make but there are 3 aces to lose plus p&p). The American guy (who has his full name in his profile) says bye all etc. and he criticizes my 2S bid. During all the exchange I have not realized that I opened a five-carder: A: Nikos, that is a terribel 2!s bid ;-)) N: why, too strong? A: You might miss a game in !H N: This is for textbooks; watch experts play and they never heed this advice A: We always heed it N: You, but not the champions; watch Vugraphs, world championships, whatever A: especially we champions N: i dont mean champions of your local club, rather champions like Rodwell A: I am an international and can tell Rodwell would call that bid idiotic N: are you playing under an assumed name? A: you do not know everyone, Nikos Mind you, I still haven't realized that I opened a 5-4 so A. was right that Rodwell would call that bid idiotic. Still, the ACBL encyclopedia had not his name, and a Google search did not reveal any prominent bridge players with that name, so either he was not an international after all or he was international in some other field. Or was he Meckstroth in disguise? After he has left and while I am dummy, I peruse the "movie" to see how many opened 2S with the alleged 6-4 hand. Curious, no one opened it! And then the penny drops, when I see at last that I only held five spades...... nikos

The double is criminal. With a minimum hand and only A QUEEN AND A JACK (sorry for the capital case but it is unbelievable!) outside the enemy suit, a double is extraterrestrial. It is not merely a question of shape. This hand is also inadequate value-wise. I would call it a 4-point hand. Your 4P is eminently correct. I only find one fault at your bidding: not having opened 2S as dealer. I know that you have four hearts but if you peruse play records from championships, you'll see all the champions opening 2S with four hearts (except the French). Whoever passes this West hand, must have a share of the blame for whatever happens next. Nikos

Hi Ben, If it is against the rules of the site, I apologize. Now that I checked, the only relevant rule I found (in the Help section) is: <<In general, one only removes a player who appears frozen (check with the player to see if he can respond to a chat message), or who is being rude or is harassing another player (such members should be reported to a BBO administrator).>> This seems to me an orientation rather than a hard rule, is there another? Or is the above rule a hard rule? Now, let me expand a bit on the general subject of "not removing partners you don't like" When I open a restricted table, I can accept or reject anyone. Now you say to me that this privilege of rejecting partners which is available when I know nothing about the partner, is unavailable when I get to know him! Isn't this illogical? Your suggested policy (boot yourself) has merit, but I think it is a disservice to the other two people who enjoy their game to have their game broken. Also, when you boot yourself you lose scores etc. although this is a minor annoyance. There is another way: to explicitly state in the table description that "weak players are removed" or sth similar, which I have seen somewhere but I find it unnecessarily offending and arrogant. Mind you, the other day I played a team match where the organizer (a strong player) had prior notice that players are removed at will. I was playing against him. Well, he changed three partners in 10 boards! At board 2 my partner butchered a game. At board 4 I had a new partner without being alerted or asked! Nikos PS As an afterthought: I, for one, would be much more offended if all at a sudden my dear partner vanished as well as the other two players, muttering excuses about the wife shouting or dinner being ready, and then discovering them playing at another table. I would find it much more useful to be told: Look mate, this table is too strong for you.

When I play bridge I dislike "mute" partners -meaning those who don't even type the customary "glp" or "wdp". I also prefer good partners. Tonight a guy came as a partner at my table, I accepted him, then I discovered he was "mute". On the second or third board, opponents reach 2S after 1S-2S and my hero leads his singleton trump. I don't like this because I have A1096. After the deal is over I discover that he had 9532 at clubs which he could safely lead. I don't want to play with a speechless pard who leads singleton trump, so I say "Bye partner" and I remove him from the table. Another comes. The ejected ex-partner privately asks why. I tell him, 1) not saying wdp, 2) leading singleton trump when other lead was available. He says, "Stop the excuses. Why don't you say properly that you don't want to play with ------s!" (name of a people). But I had luck -the new partner was also from the same country! So I used a five-letter word. nikos

To Ayjay: since you so much admire the slam-reaching capability of Precision asking bids, can you give us a couple of real-life examples where a good slam was reached using epsilon or even gamma asking bids? Nikos

Very good example, I might even agree, Ron. Would you also pass with JTxxxx AQ Qxx xxx (or Jxx)? n.

Hi all A question of style: suppose you hold six cards in one major and not four cards in the other major. Is there any hand under any combination of vulnerability-position where you would pass because your hand is too strong for a weak 2 but too weak for a 1-level opener? Is there for you a No Man's land between 2-level and 1-level openers? In my most humble opinion, there is no such an animal. If I have six cards in a major I open them at either 1 or 2 level (or perhaps at 3 or 4 level:). I believe that whoever passes a six-card major with 6 hcp or more deserves any disaster that unavoidably happens to him. I just saw an example of this in BBO Vugraph, Madeira tournament. It was Round 7, Board 6 and one team was in slam. Only one lead could beat the slam, but the consensus of the commentators was that this (diamond) lead was "out of this world". But the opening leader led an unerring diamond, beating the slam. I strongly believe that the diamond lead was a punishment from Above. You see, declarer was dealer, vul. against not, and he had originally *passed* holding: A5 QJ8643 10 3 K 10 5 Nikos

I voted for "playing" because I wasn't sure what was meant by "kibitzing". If this means "kibitzing other BBO players" then I do it rarely but if this means "watching Vugraph" then I would -also- vote for it. Or I wouldn't vote because I can't vote twice.

I was playing today with an alleged expert pickup partner. West opens 2D weak and pard ends up playing 4S with no other oppo bidding. West leads the 10 of clubs. [hv=d=w&v=n&n=sa986hj62dj9cq542&w=s5hk1084dk107632c107&e=sqj3hq9753dacj963&s=sk10742hadq854cak8]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] To my horror, the alleged expert butchered the hand. However, it is very simple: West opens 2D and West leads another suit, hence 99% West does not hold AK in diamonds, hence East is a favourite to hold a singleton top honour, A or K. True, West may have opened with a 5-carder, but how can it harm to draw two rounds of trumps and then play the diamonds as if East has a singleton honour? Nikos

About the French bridge book: I don't know if it is better, it is much more accessible. It is an initiation book. "Le squeeze simple pas a pas" by Berthe and Lebely. Very well written.

A minor nuisance or a major blessing: they will be able to keep the lin file and study it at leisure. n.

I stand corrected, Ben; in fact, Eng's book is more reader-hostile that Love's, but it is a comparative rarity and it is almost never proposed as a "must read". On the other hand, Love's book is usually touted as such while, in my humble opinion, it is extremely unreadable. Even the mnemotechnic rule coined by Love (BLUE) seems ridiculous to me. Love is hopeless in the simple cases which obviously are needed to proceed to the more complicated ones. But obviously this is my personal opinion and I may be horribly wrong. PS When I get corrected, I like to hit back: it is not E.Eng, rather Fook Eng or Hook or sth similar :rolleyes:

A word of caution: beware "Bridge squeezes complete" by Dr Love. It is easily the most opaquely-written bridge book in English language. A main reason why most American bridge players cannot squeeze is that American experts always recommend this book. There is a French book on squeezes (*not* the one of Romanet which is almost as opaque as the Love opus) but if you insist in English try a newish one by David Bird (there is the word 'squeeze' in the title') nikos

Several esteemed members here suggest that opener should not or cannot bid his spades because it would show extras or it would show a stronger suit than Q10xx or whatever. On the other hand, unless pard is playing Mafia (majors always first in answering), which by the way is an excellent method that I almost always follow, partner may well have a spade suit along with longer clubs. Let's see. The auction has gone 1H - 2C 2H and both partners may have four spades but no one has named the suit yet. Are you seriously suggesting that there is no risk of missing the spade fit?

Can't answer the poll, because no option is right. I bid 2S but I don't consider this to be "light" nor "how I play". 2S is a reverse and it does show some extras even after a 2/1 GF. This hand has more than some extras. nikos

Bizarre indeed! As a collector of bridge records, I have but four cases of slams being passed out (and bid at the other/some other table) and of these four one is apocryphal and in two cases the pass was provoked by extraneous factors. So only one genuine case remains. I wish your tourney were a bigger one so that there would be documentation. Nikos