Reputation
9,721
Next tag badge:
76/100 score
41/20 answers
Badges
3 28 76
Impact
~437k people reached

Sep
28
comment Was a bridge column “resulting” when it criticized an opening lead?
@ Pieter Geerkins: West had five spades, East had four, hence their bids. With a "solid" five card spade holding, West might have bid two spades, (treating them as six, per Marty Bergen) but didn't. I'd bid two spades with KQJTx, but one spade with KQJxx and the rest of West's hand.
Sep
27
comment Does it make sense for a defender to occasionally adopt a slightly inferior line in order to “mix up” the play?
So we're supposed to make the statistically best move at all times if we can? Wow! You make me feel bad for playing an inferior move, not knowing that it is inferior.
Sep
21
comment In Bridge, Do You Count Defensive Points In the Opponents' Suit When Making a Takeout Double?
@Pieter Geerkins: I have stopped "resulting" by basing my commentary on the theoretical three tricks I should have gone down, not the five I actually did.
Sep
20
comment In Bridge, Do You Count Defensive Points In the Opponents' Suit When Making a Takeout Double?
"Your partner's call was a bad one for various other reasons that you don't address." Why don't you answer on that basis. I value your informed opinion.
Sep
17
comment Should the “Atago” be identified as such in Midway during “search”?
@PieterGeerkens: Re-worked the question incorporating your suggestions.
Sep
3
comment Can a “crippled” aircraft carrier launch airplanes in Midway?
+1 for comment on differences between Japanese and American cultures. Maybe one "handicap" for Japanese players is that only they are allowed to launch suicide attacks.
Sep
2
comment In Midway, would it make sense for the U.S. player to save his “punch” for the arrival of the Atago on Day 2?
The only way around this is to wait for the fourth wave of Yamato, Nagato, and Mutsu at the end of the second day. The four "medium" battleships (Hiei, Kongo, Haruna, and Kirishima) all have an anti-aircraft factor of 5.
Sep
2
comment In Midway, would it make sense for the U.S. player to save his “punch” for the arrival of the Atago on Day 2?
That's certainly a consideration. But I'd put 15 dive bomber squadrons atop the Atago, at 3-1 odds against the antiaircraft fire of a battleship (5). Then 5 torpedo squadrons on either side of the ship, that's 1-1 odds against a single battleship, or cruiser. Assuming minimum hits (2, 1, 1), that should provide the four hits needed to sink the Atago. One issue is to identify which cruiser is the Atago. But I'd introduce a "house rule" to "asterisk" it. Because it is really a proxy for a bunch of transports, that can be identified separately.
Aug
30
comment Is there any good cure in Midway for Japan's lack of search capabilities?
@Npst: The difference in search reflected relative historical capabilities. The Japanese had the "option" of using their less valuable ships for "ship searches" but failed to do so. "Enhanced" air search (within the limits of the seven space rule) makes the most sense, since the Japanese have more airpower after the second day.
Aug
27
comment Does it make sense for a defender to lead a short major when opponents fail to find a fit using Stayman?
My concern is that even if partner has, say the Q or K, we might be missing the T and 9. Change the 8 to a T, so that I'm leading from JT752, and I'd lead a diamond. In the actual example, East had 64 in diamonds.
Aug
27
comment Does it make sense for a defender to lead a short major when opponents fail to find a fit using Stayman?
One point you seem to be making is that North should have bid two spades (invitational) with his ten points instead of jumping to game. Would you jump to game as North with an extra jack (11 points instead of 10? Even as it was, the contract was makeable, but the declarer blew it.
Aug
26
comment Does it make sense for a defender to lead a short major when opponents fail to find a fit using Stayman?
@AlexanderWoo: Rubber bridge.
Aug
16
comment How does Magic the Gathering play differently with proxies?
I have (hopefully) made the question more objective and wonder if it can be re-opened in its current form.
Aug
13
comment In Matchpoints, is it worth risking a ruff to try for an overtrick in the following situation?
@Tim Lymington: I deleted my answer since your (and Pieter's) comments taught me what I wanted to learn from asking the question. But the point of the question was that a lot more risks are permissible, even ex post, in Matchpoints, than in rubber.
Aug
12
comment In Matchpoints, is it worth risking a ruff to try for an overtrick in the following situation?
Actually, you answered my question with your comment. That is, if I use hearts, not clubs, for "transportation," to my hand, I have to worry about a 7-1, but not 6-2 heart split (I can overuff anything but the king in my hand). The chances of a 7-1 break is < 3%, so in Matchpoints, I take that 3% chance for the 50-50 chance of a successful finesse, and an overtrick. Accepted for your enlightening comment.
Aug
12
comment In Matchpoints, is it worth risking a ruff to try for an overtrick in the following situation?
From the question: "You lead a low spade to the Q in dummy for a finesse, and it holds (West and East play 3 and 2)." Actually, I'm worried about a 4-1 break in clubs, where East can "trump in." But the point is, with those "slim" odds against you, you should try the second finesse in Matchpoints (but not rubber)? Or am I missing something?
Aug
12
comment In Matchpoints, is it worth risking a ruff to try for an overtrick in the following situation?
In the problem, declarer went to his hand in clubs (an eight card suit), and lost a club ruff after taking, and losing the second finesse. (East went to West in diamonds.) My solution is to have declarer go to his hand via a ruff in hearts (a five card suit), on the theory that the chances of opponents' "trumping in" are smaller. And I'd take this chance only in duplicate, not rubber.
Aug
12
comment Can you play Dixit cooperatively with only 2 players?
I re-worded the question. Ones with "best" are considered "subjective" and often get closed. I made the question a yes-or-no question that can be answered "objectively."
Aug
12
comment In Matchpoints, is it worth risking a ruff to try for an overtrick in the following situation?
@PieterGeerkens: I added those details to the question.
Aug
12
comment In Matchpoints, is it worth risking a ruff to try for an overtrick in the following situation?
@PieterGeerkens: West played fourth best and East encouraged on the first trick. Both opponents played low trumps on the second. The problem started on the third: At rubber, I play A, then low in spades from dummy to ensure the contract. At Matchpoints, I play A, then low in hearts to try for an overtrick. Is that right?