SimonFa Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 I'm not complaining because for once I was a beneficiary of GIB's seemingly random play, but I was surprised to find only one GIB found the killing return in this tourney: Regards, Simon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 I appears that West believed North when he said that he had help in diamonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFa Posted February 22, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 I appears that West believed North when he said that he had help in diamonds. But even on hands without the diamond help suit bid GIB missed the play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamegumb Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 Maybe GIB read declarer for: KxxxxKJxKQJxx ? (or KxxxxxKxKQJxx)? The one time it got it right was when Blackwood was used. So maybe it believed (in cases without Blackwood) that two aces might be out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Share Posted February 22, 2012 Maybe GIB read declarer for: KxxxxKJxKQJxx ?That would make the ♦Q lead pretty strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamegumb Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 That would make the ♦Q lead pretty strange. Which leads itself to the question of what inferences GIB makes off the opening lead. (As well as what inferences it makes from the bidding - does GIB just assume that North would never drive to slam with a useless doubleton)? 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.