Am I the only one, or is it impossible for everyone to read the column today? The printing is 10 times as large as it should be. This is a new wrinkle 😉
Jeff SerandosOctober 9th, 2023 at 3:47 am
Yep, same thing for me. Glad to know I am not the only one.
Iain ClimieOctober 9th, 2023 at 10:48 am
I can shrink this with cotrol and minus but then I can’t post!
Iain
Robert LiptonOctober 9th, 2023 at 10:55 am
On today’s lead problem, do the beginners’ books still tell you to lead fourth from your longest and strongest?
Bob Lipton
bobbywolffOctober 9th, 2023 at 12:41 pm
Hi Steve, Jeff, & Iain,
My printing seems to be normal so very sorry for the less than helpful size.
Sadly I am not in a position to be able to explain, let alone rectify. However, without
promising when, and if that size continues, I’ll hopefully try to, at the very least, ask about why and can it be changed back to what is was, and still is, at least to me.
Perhaps your comments were read by someone in control so, at least for the time being, remain optimistic.
Jeff SerandosOctober 9th, 2023 at 12:50 pm
Hi Bobby,
This morning it is back to normal, thankfully. Now to read the column!
Cheers,
Jeff
bobbywolffOctober 9th, 2023 at 1:04 pm
Hi Bob,
AFAIK, yes the beginner’s books still will suggest fourth best from your longest and strongest. but that method, as well as so many more tidbits or suggestions have flown out the window as our game is just now beginning to reach it’s 100th BD.
However, if you want to delve deep, it, at least IMO, is a very close proposition with today’s
official opinion, at least from a professional side, tries to allow more factors to influence the play, such as the exact bidding, whether it is a part score or game, not to mention slam hand
etc. as well as the overall nature of your entire hand, with today’s hand representing nothing at all unusual, just the normal byproducts.
Bridge as you and I know it, was put together quickly by the people (Culbertson, Goren, and all the original theorists way back in the 1920’s) with the main idea of promotion) While
we all know and at least some want to smartly thank them for what they started, the theories back then, probably unlike the progression of chess thinking, which to me was likely much more pure (because of the nature of the game and the brains who put it together likely longer before bridge).
However, in spite of the purity of chess, methinks thinks then and yes, now, our game offers
much more individual judgment in trying to rise to the best one can be, and by doing so, can
decide for himself (or herself) just what factors are present, in this case, the mundane lead choice of a very average nature.
IOW, the particular hand today needs to be taken in account, bidding and strength, before
deciding and, if you will, even the private discussion between the two partners, if and when
they have had the time to pursue it. My guess today, represents “Much ado about nothing”, (or, at least) not much!
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Am I the only one, or is it impossible for everyone to read the column today? The printing is 10 times as large as it should be. This is a new wrinkle 😉
Yep, same thing for me. Glad to know I am not the only one.
I can shrink this with cotrol and minus but then I can’t post!
Iain
On today’s lead problem, do the beginners’ books still tell you to lead fourth from your longest and strongest?
Bob Lipton
Hi Steve, Jeff, & Iain,
My printing seems to be normal so very sorry for the less than helpful size.
Sadly I am not in a position to be able to explain, let alone rectify. However, without
promising when, and if that size continues, I’ll hopefully try to, at the very least, ask about why and can it be changed back to what is was, and still is, at least to me.
Perhaps your comments were read by someone in control so, at least for the time being, remain optimistic.
Hi Bobby,
This morning it is back to normal, thankfully. Now to read the column!
Cheers,
Jeff
Hi Bob,
AFAIK, yes the beginner’s books still will suggest fourth best from your longest and strongest. but that method, as well as so many more tidbits or suggestions have flown out the window as our game is just now beginning to reach it’s 100th BD.
However, if you want to delve deep, it, at least IMO, is a very close proposition with today’s
official opinion, at least from a professional side, tries to allow more factors to influence the play, such as the exact bidding, whether it is a part score or game, not to mention slam hand
etc. as well as the overall nature of your entire hand, with today’s hand representing nothing at all unusual, just the normal byproducts.
Bridge as you and I know it, was put together quickly by the people (Culbertson, Goren, and all the original theorists way back in the 1920’s) with the main idea of promotion) While
we all know and at least some want to smartly thank them for what they started, the theories back then, probably unlike the progression of chess thinking, which to me was likely much more pure (because of the nature of the game and the brains who put it together likely longer before bridge).
However, in spite of the purity of chess, methinks thinks then and yes, now, our game offers
much more individual judgment in trying to rise to the best one can be, and by doing so, can
decide for himself (or herself) just what factors are present, in this case, the mundane lead choice of a very average nature.
IOW, the particular hand today needs to be taken in account, bidding and strength, before
deciding and, if you will, even the private discussion between the two partners, if and when
they have had the time to pursue it. My guess today, represents “Much ado about nothing”, (or, at least) not much!