[pooltuna]

MrAce, on 2012-February-06, 15:23, said:

Justin never said West should not balance if 2♦ was passed to him and he is on pass out seat. DBL of 3♦ in OP is totally another story though. If thats what you meant, if not please disregard what i said.

I was talking about an anti LOTTist 2 card raise of the PJS 2♦ call

[nige1]

Bbradley62 asks us to assign the blame.



Perhaps North-South for overbidding losing a slow ♥ and two black AKs

---

[rhm]

gwnn, on 2012-February-06, 09:29, said:

Absolutely, and I am the first one who will admit to doing this (later I look at the hand records and say "how did I not double there? it's so wtp now that I look at it on paper.."). To be clear and completely open what my point was supposed to be: rhm sometimes makes very sweeping and not flattering characterisations about people who happen to hold the opposite view on one hand. I don't know a very good word for this, but it is something like "demonisation"? I remember once he called people who overcalled "Those, who over-call here just like to hear themselves and their over-calls do not serve any purpose." and there are some other examples of this. Anyway, I am sure some of these demonisations (let's just stick to this word for this post) are well-deserved, but in this case it was particularly amusing to see who were on the wrong side of the "successful people vs. result merchants" dichotomy.

and just to make one thing clear: I don't know how successful rhm is in real life but I am almost 100% sure that he is more successful than I am and a much better player. But this one particular aspect of his posting style is one that I don't particularly like.

With all due respect gwnn, I object to your characterization.
I have demonized nobody and the fact that you put this word in quotes does not make your slur (critic would not be the right word here) any fairer.
I admit I prefer an open provocative style and dislike "political correct" language. In general I am not the oversensitive type you seem to be.
I also object to the demagogic way you quote me out of context.

Rainer Herrmann

[gwnn]

rhm, on 2012-February-07, 05:04, said:

With all due respect gwnn, I object to your characterization.
I have demonized nobody and the fact that you put this word in quotes does not make your slur (critic would not be the right word here) any fairer.
I admit I prefer an open provocative style and dislike "political correct" language. In general I am not the oversensitive type you seem to be.
I also object to the demagogic way you quote me out of context.

Rainer Herrmann

In which way have I quoted you out of context? I know you did not say that all successful players double and you did not say that all passers are result merchants. However, you created a silly contrast and I still think it is funny that none of the very successful players in this thread double, in fact they all called double absurd. It's ok to be wrong sometimes rhm, it is also ok to admit it.

[rhm]

gwnn, on 2012-February-07, 05:14, said:

In which way have I quoted you out of context?

You quoted one sentence out of context from

http://www.bridgebas...__1#entry557417

You took that "near personal" (whatever that is) at that time and people disagreed with you there already.
The sentence you quote seems to have been deeply burnt in your mind. Hard to say why.
I have never claimed I am right all the time nor even that I am right more often than others and I freely admit I have changed my mind more than once.

But nothing so far has convinced me that the ones, who call West DBL of 3♦ "absurd" are correct here. Borderline I would always accept.
The Passers have refused to answer the arguments raised in this threat and only pointed out that West has opened already with 12 HCP.
I knew that from the outset when I dissented from the Passers. I am so arrogant to claim that there is a bit more to hand evaluation than point count.
Point count does not rule everything in this game, in particular not in competitive fit auctions.

Rainer Herrmann

[gwnn]

It was not burnt in my mind, it's just that this post in this thread here reminded me of it. I openly admit that "near personal" is not a very good expression and neither is demonisation (I have openly admitted both even before this post). I don't have a very good word for it. All I am saying is that you are not really attacking the call but at least partly also attack the persons who are making such a call. Note that JLOGIC did not call you retarded, and despite the fact that you are not over-sensitive, you thought he was. He called the action retarded, something he freely does to some of his actions too.

In the other thread I still don't see how my quote was out of context. You said you strongly preferred pass and gave some reasons for it, and then went on to say that overcallers only like to hear their own voice. You assigned some (very) negative attributes to the people to make their action look absurd. At least this is my impression. I quoted the part that I thought was of bad taste. I never said that was your whole post.

[rhm]

gwnn, on 2012-February-07, 06:06, said:

It was not burnt in my mind, it's just that this post in this thread here reminded me of it. I openly admit that "near personal" is not a very good expression and neither is demonisation (I have openly admitted both even before this post). I don't have a very good word for it. All I am saying is that you are not really attacking the call but at least partly also attack the persons who are making such a call. Note that JLOGIC did not call you retarded, and despite the fact that you are not over-sensitive, you thought he was. He called the action retarded, something he freely does to some of his actions too.

In the other thread I still don't see how my quote was out of context. You said you strongly preferred pass and gave some reasons for it, and then went on to say that overcallers only like to hear their own voice. You assigned some (very) negative attributes to the people to make their action look absurd. At least this is my impression. I quoted the part that I thought was of bad taste. I never said that was your whole post.

You have a tendency to interpret comments in a way they were not meant to be and I am getting tired arguing with you what I meant and what not.

JLOGIC called DBL of 3♦ retarded and even you will probably agree that a bid can not be retarded only the people making a bid can be considered as such.
There is no principal difference here to calling PASSers result merchants.
Now I do have enough self esteem to know that JLOGIC will often disagree with me (fine!) but I doubt he considers me retarded.
I am not flattered by his adjective, but neither am I offended. I only took up his word in a reply in a self ironic manner, no more.
You apparently did not understand the irony. As I said I do not mind an open provocative language and I take comments with a pinch of salt.
If you could do likewise you would do us a favor.

Rainer Herrmann

[gwnn]

rhm, on 2012-February-07, 06:50, said:

JLOGIC called DBL of 3♦ retarded and even you will probably agree that a bid can not be retarded only the people making a bid can be considered as such.

Unfortunately I do not agree with this at all. If you can't see how an action can be called retarded without calling people committing that particular action retarded, it is probably a waste of everyone's time to talk about any of this. I apologise for wasting your time and for filling up cyberspace with these ideas.

[han]

Stop being overly sensitive Csaba, let's talk about bridge.

[gnasher]

The word you wanted might have been "disparagement".

[FrancesHinden]

phil_20686, on 2012-February-06, 11:36, said:

I do honestly believe that the difference between what people say on the forums and what they habitually do at the table is quite large. Sports psychologists call this "errors of execution", and I imagine that for many of us on the forums, they are the biggest obstacle. I certainly feel like they are for me. I think playing with confidence is often synonymous with making few or no errors of execution. I don't really know what one can do about this other than play more at a high level.

This is true, but I think here you are talking about something slightly different. For example, gnasher & I have been teammates enough so that we both know that (for example) we both go off in contracts at the table that we make on the forums. People also do stupid things at the table that they don't do in the forums - they forget the responses to keycard, or take a finesse rather than claiming their top tricks, or all sorts of things they are embarrassed about later.

That's not the same as bidding fundamentally differently at the table compared to on the forums.

(p.s. it's true not many posters advocate psyching when given a problem, but opening 1NT 3rd at green on a club pre-empt is positively normal bridge in some circles...)

[FrancesHinden]

OK, back to why some of us don't like the double of 3D.

All the posts about this have been talking about the risk of getting doubled and/or of going for 200 at matchpoints, but that's not the (only) reason not to double.

If you think a minimum opening bid is a takeout double, then you are either going to get to game far too often, or you are going to miss a lot of good games. When you double 3D here you are inviting partner to bid game if he thinks it is making; partner can have a reasonable hand and pass over 2D, particularly if you don't play negative free bids. So if you double on this type of hand then either partner can never bid game, or you will miss game when you actually have a good hand, or you will raise when you have a good hand, find partner doesn't, and go off.

Also, sometimes partner will pass your double on some boring minimum 3343 hand and it will make, because they have too many high cards.