EDIT: It got me days to find what this nonsense was about, first post edited.
blame my partner, not me!
#22
Posted 2007-February-25, 06:44
Eddie Wold is an expert from Texas.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
Our ultimate goal on defense is to know by trick two or three everyone's hand at the table. -- Mike777
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#23
Posted 2007-February-28, 07:32
He is Wold class, isn´t he?
Kind Regards
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#24
Posted 2007-February-28, 08:15
I did a quick check on the ACBL website "search," and the first ten pages or so indicated with fairly reliable results that there are about a half dozen Wold's who have done something in tournaments in the ACBL, named Wold but not Eddie. The highest ACBL ranking was under 1500 masterpoints, with most being C/D/E/F pairs.
So,
It seems rather unfair to keep having these Wold Championships, when Eddie is presumably so far ahead of the other Wolds.
And now for something completely different.
Has anyone else noticed that the other Eddie's books are a very good read, like a nice ride through the pastures of bridge thought?
So,
It seems rather unfair to keep having these Wold Championships, when Eddie is presumably so far ahead of the other Wolds.
And now for something completely different.
Has anyone else noticed that the other Eddie's books are a very good read, like a nice ride through the pastures of bridge thought?
"Gibberish in, gibberish out. A trial judge, three sets of lawyers, and now three appellate judges cannot agree on what this law means. And we ask police officers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and citizens to enforce or abide by it? The legislature continues to write unreadable statutes. Gibberish should not be enforced as law."
-P.J. Painter.
-P.J. Painter.
#25
Posted 2007-February-28, 08:30
Here is the problem, which I think is causing the discussion. Can this 4♥ bid be natural? That is, can North have both enough value for a jump to 4♥ and a four card heart suit (4-3's with the hand with four cards short in the opponents suit, is not a good idea, the short hand should be the one with three trumps) and still ONLY have bid 2♣ over 1♠ as opposed to a negative double, for instance.
The answer is no. You can not construct such a hand. Even on the given hand, reverse norths majors.. even wiht xxxx of hearts, that would be a negative double. It is just too good to risk playing in a 5-3 club fit in 2♣ with 4♥ potentially laydown opposite many 1♣ opening bids.
So bridge logic seems to rule out 4♥ being anything other than a splinter, at least to me, as "extra values" with hearts doesn't seem like a possible bid on this auction. (if 2♣ was somehow forcing, then of course, 4♥ could and probably should be natural but an arguement could made that even in that case, 3♥ would be forcing so no need to jump to show hearts and extra values).
The answer is no. You can not construct such a hand. Even on the given hand, reverse norths majors.. even wiht xxxx of hearts, that would be a negative double. It is just too good to risk playing in a 5-3 club fit in 2♣ with 4♥ potentially laydown opposite many 1♣ opening bids.
So bridge logic seems to rule out 4♥ being anything other than a splinter, at least to me, as "extra values" with hearts doesn't seem like a possible bid on this auction. (if 2♣ was somehow forcing, then of course, 4♥ could and probably should be natural but an arguement could made that even in that case, 3♥ would be forcing so no need to jump to show hearts and extra values).
--Ben--

Help
