[aguahombre]

gwnn, on Aug 27 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

I feel a little sorry for them, really unlucky to get a 4-4-3-2 just like that after a 1♣ opening and by the other partner

I aassume you mean it was unlucky that the hands occurred back to back, so someone would notice ---and this whole thread could have been avoided.

[lamford]

jeremy69, on Aug 27 2009, 03:04 PM, said:

Quote

In what way?

Because there is a suspicion that they do not do as they have said but merely invented an approach to satisfy the questioners which is tough to check and are actually playing a random club or diamond.

Also because:

"Bridge TDs and ACs are expected to use judgement in their decisions, and that includes ruling against someone who has "got round" a regulation, even if it seems to be legal."

[bluejak]

In what way have they got round a regulation? Which regulation?

[gwnn]

aguahombre, on Aug 28 2009, 12:15 AM, said:

gwnn, on Aug 27 2009, 01:01 PM, said:

I feel a little sorry for them, really unlucky to get a 4-4-3-2 just like that after a 1♣ opening and by the other partner

I aassume you mean it was unlucky that the hands occurred back to back, so someone would notice ---and this whole thread could have been avoided.

No of course it's good that the thread was created and I think they're sort of cheating, but you have to admit, the two hands occurring back to back, against astute enough opponents is really unlucky for them

[aguahombre]

By the way, I did not mean to imply that the first hand actually was opened 1C on a 2-bagger ---She actually had six of them. Only the second hand was 4 4 3 2.

The significance, to us was that, after being informed that 1C could be short, and knowing they did not play any sophisticated methods, there was an assumption when 1D was opened on the second hand that it was a 4-card suit. Or, maybe a very strong 3-bagger. Hence, no questioning seemed necessary. Opening leader held AQTXX in the diamond suit and chose to lead the heart ten from t9x.

Dummy: AK9X AXXX KXX TX.

If I had been really into it, I might have shifted to the Jack of diamonds from my doubleton. (T8XX KQX JX JXXX) Certainly this shift would have been harder (ethically) if partner had asked questions first. It would seem that asking would imply suspicion that they were playing two different methods.

Cheating is not involved. At least not consciously --they merely agreed to disagree, which we did not know, should not be expected to know, and could affect our defense.

[FrancesHinden]

aguahombre, on Aug 27 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Maybe forums like this (fori?) will help that to happen.

Fora

[nigel_k]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 28 2009, 11:36 AM, said:

aguahombre, on Aug 27 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Maybe forums like this (fori?) will help that to happen.

Fora

Heh. I used to say indices instead of indexes but I had to stop because too many people laughed at me

[NickRW]

Languages morph over time. As a kid I remember BBC sports commentators used to say "stadia" - now they say "stadiums". Actually I couldn't believe it - because I looked up stadia all those years ago - then I had to check again in a more recent dictionary - indeed things apparently had changed without me noticing!

Nick

[blackshoe]

Nero Wolfe, a rather famous (albeit fictional) private detective, was once found in his office, burning his brand new Webster's Unabridged Dictionary page by page. When his sidekick Archie Goodwin asked him why he was doing that, Wolfe scowled and said "Contact is *not* a verb!"

[mjj29]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 28 2009, 11:36 AM, said:

aguahombre, on Aug 27 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Maybe forums like this (fori?) will help that to happen.

Fora

forapodes

[Humper]

nigel_k, on Aug 30 2009, 06:06 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Aug 28 2009, 11:36 AM, said:

aguahombre, on Aug 27 2009, 06:51 PM, said:

Maybe forums like this (fori?) will help that to happen.

Fora

Heh. I used to say indices instead of indexes but I had to stop because too many people laughed at me

Both are acceptable. I did have to yell at my graduate students, though, when they thought the singular was "indicee" (spelling unknown, this error only happened orally).

[TimG]

TimG, on Aug 26 2009, 10:37 AM, said:

I think the choice of opening 1C or 1D with a 4=4=3=2 hand can well be a "style" thing.

I have a note from Butch Campbell at ACBL which says that this approach (one partner systemically opens 1D, the other 1C, when holding 4=4=3=2) constitutes two different methods and would not be allowed in ACBL.

Tim

[Apollo81]

This is two different systems because you are allowed to play a lot of defenses against the 1♣ showing 2+ than you would be allowed to if it were 3+.

Would I ever complain if a pair used this against me? No. It's a trivial variation, and these people are doing their best to disclose their methods.