First, a reminder that the ACBL is running a digital NABC this week on BBO.
Greg has been out of town, so our practice has been limited to Cuebids. I have been doing some robot tournaments and VuGraph review. My morning routine is going well, and I’m walking and meditating every day.
I’ve been using the two counting apps I created with Claude every day. One is a pattern app, just like the one Fred Gitelman created years ago, where you are given 3 numbers and have to complete the 13-card pattern. The other is a simulation of seeing the dummy after declarer has opened 1NT. It’s two steps: the first step you add your points to dummy’s and subtract from 40, to get the total of the other two hands; the second step, you subtract declarer’s 15 HCP and get partner’s maximum. I found that seeing the numbers activated a different part of my brain than seeing the cards and counting in my head, so I have an audio mode where I close my eyes and the numbers are read aloud to me. One of the cool things about these Claude “artifacts” is that you can rework them if there’s something that you’d like to change. I’d love to hear how useful you find them, and if there are any tweaks you make to improve them.
My big news is that I finally enrolled at my local gym. This was one of the original goals in January; it only took my 9 months! This is what my coach calls a “Frog.” Mark Twain said, “If it’s your job to eat a frog, it’s best to do it first thing in the morning. And If it’s your job to eat two frogs, it’s best to eat the biggest one first.” This has often been misquoted as: “Eat a live frog first thing in the morning and nothing worse will happen to you the rest of the day.”
There are things we don’t want to do—eating a frog. Best to rip the Band-Aid off and do get it done; the rest of the day will seem easier.
We all have these “Frogs” that we know we need to do but we resist. Signing up for the gym was definitely one for me. So I’m celebrating the fact that I did it.
My body is not celebrating. I had my onboarding assessment on Tuesday. They kept assuring me it was not a “workout,” but my legs were sore for the rest of the week; I was pretty worried about what an actual workout would do to me. I had my first class on Saturday. We learned kettlebell swings and the Turkish Get Up. It was a pretty gentle introduction, and I’m less sore than I expected. Though I did soak in Epsom salt and have a massage afterwards. I’m exercising, but not punishing myself!
My initial commitment is 6 weeks; then I can decide if I want to continue.
I’m almost done with Kelsey’s classic Killing Defence at Bridge. My routine of reading a chapter while having my morning tea is working great.
I have a bad habit when reading these “problem”-type bridge books of skipping right to reading the solution. The way to get the most out of this type of book is to stop and treat it like you are at the table and decide what you’re going to do. You need to commit and then get the immediate feedback—were you wrong or right? I’m getting better at making myself do it, and I’m getting more right as the book progresses.
One of the issues with books like this is that it’s much easier to solve things when they are are presented as problems. When the first three tricks are described and then he says, “Plan the defense,” it’s much easier to find the unblock or falsecard or whatever the lesson is. Especially when it’s the theme of the chapter. There’s not much that can be done about this shortcoming, but it’s important to be aware of. Someone said, “Treat every decision as though it were presented to you as a problem.” A great idea in theory; in practice, you just can’t devote that much time and brain power to every card you play or bid you make.
Here’s an example:
“Your partner leads the knave of hearts against South’s 3NT contract. The three is played from dummy, you encourage with the eight and South plays the two. West continues with the nine of hearts, and you drop your queen under dummy’s king. The three of diamonds is now led from dummy. How do you plan the defence?”
Kelsey’s analysis is that partner has to have the A to set the contract, so you need to go up with your K and clear the heart suit while partner still has an entry.
That’s not an impossible play to find, and on reflection is is unlikely to hurt if that’s not the layout. Presented as a problem, it’s not that hard to find. In real life, would I have the discipline to work it out and override the ingrained habit of second-hand low? I doubt it.
Notice that Kelsey did not stop until the key play—you had already made two decisions, but he considered them routine and glossed over them. To make this sort of exercise realistic, I think you need to make the reader commit at every decision point; that hides when the important decision appears. That makes the book longer and harder to get through—many of the times you stop and ask “what would you do?” are going to be mind-numbingly boring. There’s no perfect solution. Kelsey’s presentation certainly works, and his analysis is always enlightening.
I’ll write up my full thoughts once I finish it this week.
Have a great week!
Adam, you’re absolutely right about the trouble with problem books like Kelsey. They give you the tools to solve defensive problems - but it’s tough to recognize the problems quickly among all the “normal” hands. Suppose there was a software program that could download, say, 20 hands at a time, 12 of which contained a variety of defensive problems. Another issue is that your goal is always to beat the contract. That’s fine if you’re playing IMPs - but what about match points?
I have tried to save and put on my desk top but cannot do. So will get a friend to help me