peachy Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 Jos Jacobs and Marjo Chorus reported some hands from the Playoff between USA Blue and Netherlands Red, in the daily bulletin today. http://www.worldbridge.org/bulletin/09_1%2.../pdf/Bul_06.pdf It pretty much characterizes the match as US being lucky despite their poor judgment in bidding and defense/leads. Euphemisms were used but they were so poorly masked that it might as well have said what I just "translated" it into. Read it yourself and see if you agree. Or am I being too sensitive? PS: Congrats to you all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 I don't agree. Looks more or less objective to me. I thought their castigation of MiniMeck's 1♥ overcall was misguided - surely his partner's double was bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb79 Posted August 19, 2009 Report Share Posted August 19, 2009 I read the bulletin and I don't agree with OP either. It was a fun read. J. Lall was admired for his defense for two boards at least. Maybe you're stuck at "Is God Italian or is he American?" remark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 ? If this is offensive, you may be very sensitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 It is obvious that the authors are Dutch, but I don't think they are saying the Americans are bad and lucky particularly often. In that respect I found them quite balanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jlall Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 I did not think this was offensive at all. The international bridge press is often brutal when they write up some of my....adventures... but they have been very kind to me so far and I'm quite happy with it. Of course sometimes they would have been right to be more harsh... in my case at least :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onno Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I don't agree. Looks more or less objective to me. I thought their castigation of MiniMeck's 1♥ overcall was misguided - surely his partner's double was bad. Agree with gwnn. The authors seem to have a dislike of aggressive initial action, especially when it doesn't work. This made me laugh: Maybe, talented young players should betrained to play rubber bridge for money; too shaded overcalls and sub-standard pre-empts will disappear very quickly, we would think. after Marion went for 800 after 1st hand red Multi by Bob on K76532 985 - AQ98. My suggestion would be the opposite: talented young players should actively continue to explore to borders of aggression in this phase of their bridge life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggieb Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 My suggestion would be the opposite: talented young players should actively continue to explore to borders of aggression in this phase of their bridge life. I just wanted to say that I think this is a really good observation, and it does not apply just to preempting of course, but to every aspect of competitive and uncontested bidding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_KARLUK Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 ♠♥♦♣ If you believe you were in the right point rest doesn't matter too much. So let comparison in historical records decide to the future. Hopefully everybody liked Istanbul and hospitality of Turks :lol: Hey! Come to visit anytime please. We will miss you. ♠♥♦♣ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.