At 5C doubled, would you have ducked the KS lead?

🙂

Hi Jim2,

I would like to think that I would, but alas, I probably wouldn’t.

However, a philosophical discussion about time consumption, while playing high-level bridge, is probably warranted.

I am a fast player, probably too quick, which invariably makes me more susceptible to error. Let us consider the difference between chess and bridge. While playing chess, everything is laid out in front of the player and his opponent, and by that specific fact alone, there are no ethical strictures such as giving unauthorized information (UI) which is definitely not true in bridge.

Enter time measured by chess clocks, which incidentally some bridge aficionados think should be used to also measure sometimes and almost always arguably, unnecessary time, consumed by slow bridge players.

Yes, bridge time should also be judged and irritating slowness should NOT be allowed, but especially so when UI could be involved when the defense takes the time. Also as declarer, the debate rages as to the ethicality to being unduly slow to the point of ridiculous, even by declarer where UI is not an issue.

In the interest of not writing (and possibly boring) forever I will end my rant abruptly by saying there, at least to me, certain time restrictions ever present in bridge, which should be responsibly felt by all players and dealt with accordingly. Granted, there are some very thorny problems which arise which sometimes are disguised and in reality may make a significant difference or, on the other hand, may not.

However, my own opinion is that bridge should be played at a much faster pace than should chess, even sometimes at the cost of accuracy and especially by the defense because of UI and by everyone because of sheer enjoyment of the game itself by the players and like other big time TV, moneyed sports, by all the viewers and in bridge, kibitzers.

The key word in this whole discussion has to be REASONABLE or at least close to that meaning.