[han]

Now I also dare to say that I'm mentally retarded as well. Shouldn't be a surprise to anybody. Nt sure that it is best to play 3H as fit non jump, I only know that that's how I play it with Arend.

I would also lead a spade. Tough decision. I think that those who don't lead a spade only because they fear partner's reaction should grow up.

[FrancesHinden]

han, on May 31 2008, 08:50 PM, said:

I think that those who don't lead a spade only because they fear partner's reaction should grow up.

One of my regular partners says people lead partner's suit too often, and if they do it because they are frightened of the post mortem they need a new partner.

p.s. he led a spade when given the problem. Eventually.

[han]

Yeah ok, maybe it is partner that needs to grow up.

I remember reading somewhere that the top computer programs are very good at opening leads and that they lead partner's suit less often than humans. Not sure if it was posted on these forums or I read it somewhere else, I remember it as being trustworthy but as so often I don't remember the source. Like my mother telling me I shouldn't eat yogurt with my fruit.

[kenrexford]

The whole deal?

[OleBerg]

jdonn, on May 31 2008, 07:46 PM, said:

kenrexford, on May 30 2008, 11:32 PM, said:

jdonn, on May 30 2008, 06:49 PM, said:

gnasher, on May 30 2008, 06:24 PM, said:

I'm mentally retarded to the extent that I play 3♥ as a fit bid.  You boys seem to save a lot of bids for hands that might have preempted but didn't.

True, better to have 8 bids that raise partner and 2 bids that don't....

I'm not sure how this reply goes very far.

I mean, take transfers. It would sound rather silly to object that, after a transfer to hearts, we have 2♥, 2♠, 2NT, 3♣, 3♦, and 3♥ all to show heart support of some variety and nothing to show anything else.

So, sure. A person might want 8 bids that raise partner and two bids that don't.

Oh! And, I'd lead a heart.

I can't blast you as roundly as someone else did since it's not my fight. So thank you as always for your totally profound and in-context example of how a hand already confined to a very tight range of shape and strength opposite a potential yarbrough is in the exact same situation as a hand on a very wide range of strength and no range of shape opposite a hand that has promised some minimum of values.

Hi jdonn,

I hope my sarcasm-detector is fine-tuned, as it gives quite a reading in your post.

Allthough I agree with you and jlall, that Kens posts sometimes lack substance and diverge from the original topic, I believe you're handling the situation all wrong.

Instead of being bothered by his posts, take comfort in what you can learn from them.

Sometimes, just sometimes, he actually has a point.

Like in the post you quote. His point is, that according to context, your priorities (for how many bids you would want to show suppport) may vary. Thats why he gave two examples from different contexts.

Anyway, even if you believe him to be wrong almost all the time, you can still learn from him. By proving him wrong, you are forced to formulate, in an easy to understand fashion, why you yourself are right. By doing this, you learn something yourself, and other readers, as well as Ken, might learn somthing too.

And if not to learn, why post in these forums?

[gnasher]

Come on Justin, tell us what the full hand was, so that Ken can say "I told you so" and I can try to backtrack on my previous backtracking. Or not, depending on how many spades we make.

[JLOGIC]

gnasher, on 2008-June-01, 05:43, said:

Come on Justin, tell us what the full hand was, so that Ken can say "I told you so" and I can try to backtrack on my previous backtracking. Or not, depending on how many spades we make.

Don't remember I'm surprised that I chose a spade, I have always been a big heart leader in this type of spot. Frances made some good points for a spade lead though.

LOLTARDSIMO.

[Zelandakh]

4 years and 5 months - that must be some kind of record for a reply on BBF. How do you find these old threads Justin?!!

[twoshy]

Such gold mines of entertainment too

[PhilKing]

I used to get angry after a massive losing run at poker as well.

And as a passed hand I play 3♥ as a fit non jump, but the great Segal would have given me a bollocking if I did it on AT9xx. Oh crap, this is a lead problem!

[JLOGIC]

This forum 5 years ago certainly had a Robson segal bias and I still think the Brits do. Anyways many threads did revolve around for non jumps lol. I will still admit I thin it s ridiculous when you pass that you cannot bid a suit later in man y cases but to each their own.

As far as nostalgia On every forum I think regs tend to think of years before as a much better time but I do think that this forum has gotten better about answering problems in the context they are given rather than side tracking with their pet method. As for me I guess I'm somewhat better at not calling people yards but I think of all my flame wars the one with ken was my favorite local. !h ken.

[JLOGIC]

PhilKing, on 2012-November-07, 13:38, said:

I used to get angry after a massive losing run at poker as well.

Lol the forums always tilted me more than poker. I still don't know who segal is, is he a top player or more of the writer of Robson's ideas?

[PhilKing]

JLOGIC, on 2012-November-07, 14:01, said:

Lol the forums always tilted me more than poker. I still don't know who segal is, is he a top player or more of the writer of Robson's ideas?

He was an incredibly talented but flawed player and he doesn't play any more. He was more of a theorist - they were his ideas, not Robson's.

[JLOGIC]

Makes sense thanks.

[lalldonn]

Surprised this was your favorite flame war. It's good but I can recall a few better. I think this is a tough lead problem. I led a spade then and now I'm really on the fence. I think I'll stick with spade but I'm not confident either way.

[JLOGIC]

I meant overall with ken not this thread in particular. Anyways, I'm with you I still have no confidence what is right here good problem.