Leaderboard

The tables yo cite show that the drop has been very substantial and I would be interested in explanations of why. We might expect the problem to be self-perpetuating: A teen age mother lives in pverty, the children are prought up ni poverty, the children grow up and have children before they are ready, and so on. But somehow this seems to be not the whole story. One could, optimisticall, thinnk that the child of poverty decided that s/he wants his/her life to be better and so decides to put off child bearing. Or maybe anti-poverty programs have helped. Pr community programs to help young people make better choices. Or some combination. Anyway, it would be interesting to hear what those who study this have concluded. Another point of interest. I suppose few girls age 15 choose to get pregnant, or at least I hope not. Unintended pregnancies still happen. But how about the 17-19 year olds. For statistics to really be useful, details are often needed. Did the pregnancy just happen as one of those things or was it a conscious decision to bear a child? Sometimes one, sometimes the other no doubt, but the numbers would be interesting. Anyway, it is good to see the numbers dropping. I was at a Bat Mitzvah sometime back where the father spoke: "You are now 13, an age where you can marry according to Jewish law. Your father has other ideas." I liked that a lot. What was right in Biblical times, and perhaps was manageable a hundred years ago, is a disaster today. Disasters are sometimes from bad circumstances, sometimes from bad choices, often from a bit of both. The dropping rate of teen pregnancy is a very good thing, I would like to hear just how it came about. The answer might be useful in addressing our many other social problems.

tim_ucin M1cha Score: 60.00% Rank: 1/2 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1e13d459.272d.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492846038&u=tim_ucin

m1cha - tim_ucin 4.0 - 6.0 http://webutil.bridg...2846038&u=m1cha

tim_ucin olegru Score: 45.00% Rank: 2/2 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:079e8a24.272d.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492846001&u=tim_ucin

He didn't make a line of play statement? I would rule he loses two tricks. "Possible" isn't good enough.

gordontd - natali_ 60% - 40% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:b5be4fd4.2797.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492891820&u=gordontd

Round 5 vs. maximusg pending. Round 6: crazy4hoop 5 sieong 5 I knew I misplayed board 7! http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:80720586.2710.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492833748&u=crazy4hoop

rd 12 (I haven't played 5-11 yet, but he challenged me and I had no others to play, so played it. I'm sorry if this messes anything up. stoppiello 55% - Ovncylmz 45% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:f72ec5dc.27c9.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492913404&u=stoppiello

About this "having none"... not many people say it, but it should be in their strategic arsenal. What players need to do is evaluate how damaging the MPC will be. If not a lot, they should ask partner to have another look. On the other hand, when the MPC will be more expensive than the established revoke, they should keep mum, with a good chance of the revoke now becoming established. The revoker, for his part, must aim to play the card he didn't play at the most damaging (to declarer) possible moment. The idea is to make sure that the revoke penalty will be insufficient to restore equity, in which case you don't have to pay it at all!

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:69371bb2.279b.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492893409&u=linxu01 linxu01 55% Smerriman 45%

Round 6 Icycookie - ovuncylmz 4.5 - 5.5 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:0da335ff.26a4.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492787170&u=icycookie Round 8 Icycookie - gordontd 6.5 - 3.5 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:fb5e2f2c.26ac.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492791005&u=icycookie

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:15f857f8.2783.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492882962&u=LinxU01 linxu01 60% Nige1 40%

Wackojack 65% M1cha 35% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:161d9ec5.26ea.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492817249&u=wackojack

ArtK78 over Pio_Magic 75/25 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:5a199bb1.2752.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492862031&u=ArtK78

tim_ucin cherdano Score: 55.00% Rank: 1/2 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1fdedf1a.2731.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492847759&u=tim_ucin

Ant590 vs Pio_magic 4-6 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:ca14af0d.2653.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492752697

Round 5 sieong - icycookie [icycookie reported] Round 7 sieong - impfdich 4.5 - 5.5 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:e011203d.2719.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492837774&u=sieong

Round 4: crazy4hoop: 5.5 JJ_ 4.5 Aargh! I lost focus on board 3 and was on my way to making 2S the way it was defended. Oh well. http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:d196ecf4.2609.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492720927&u=crazy4hoop

lose 4.5:5.5 to both nige1 and olegru http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1d4d9041.2783.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492882974&u=Frank0 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:caabe3ca.26d2.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492807244&u=frank0

rd 4 stoppiello 35% spyrosm 65% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:84a4d578.2698.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492782216&u=stoppiello

tim_ucin phoenix214 Score: 65.00% Rank: 1/2 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:4624ad74.25a2.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492676454&u=tim_ucin

m1cha - olegru 5.0 - 5.0 http://webutil.bridg...2773538&u=m1cha

7:3 vs. cherdano http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:f494d2a2.26d2.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492807314&u=frank0

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1d3b9f98.2742.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492855056&u=linxu01 linxu01 75% Tim_ucin 25%

jexa_ / pio_magic 30 / 70 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:2d6340ef.265e.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492757158&u=pio_magic#row-

Event 8A Group B Round 10 Nige1 = 6.5 Olegru = 3.5 Nige1 won with 65% Event 8A Group B Round 15 Nige1 = 4.5 ArtK78 = 5.5 Artk78 won with 55%

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:baf11f60.26ca.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492803781&u=linxu01 linxu01 45% ArtK78 55%

nullve - jexa_ 6 - 4 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:1abebcdd.273a.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492851616&u=nullve

http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:f9d4739e.266c.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492763514&u=linxu01 linxu01 60% Eagles123 40%

tim_ucin frank0 Score: 55.00% Rank: 1/2 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:3c0b802f.2742.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492855108&u=tim_ucin

Nige1 70% Wackojack 30% http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:a83ffebc.2666.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492760800&u=wackojack

ArtK78 over Frank0 60/40 http://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/tview.php?t=ARDCHALLENGE:f3c09359.271b.11e7.b134.0cc47a39aeb4-1492838666&u=ArtK78

Using http://bridge.esmarkkappel.dk/ .... Small to the Ace is 72.96% losing only to K10xx(x) on either side.

Why not just bang down the ace? For running the 9 vs. low to the Q, the stiff T/stiff K cases on the left cancel each other out. Running the 9 picks up the KTxx onside cases but loses to the Tx/KTx offside cases, these also happen to cancel out, given the problem's vacant spaces calculation. It seems these lines are even for 4 tricks, so might as well low to the Q to pick up 5 tricks when Kx onside? Banging down the ace picks up everything low to the Q does, + one more stiff honor offside.

Have you ever taken a look at the correlation between unmarried teen high school dropouts and political governance? The 10 states with the highest rate of teenage pregnancies are almost all Red states, while the 10 with the lowest are almost all Blue states. You do keep trying to convince us with your superficial right wing talking points, but the problem for you is that many of us understand that reality is a little more nuanced than O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck et al appear to think. As for your assertion: show me who, on the 'left', says that unmarried teen mothers make good parents? Show me someone advocating for unmarried teenage girls to become parents. You know who does? Right wing 'pro-life' people. Sure, they all say that the girl should not get pregnant, but they all also say that sex education is bad, contraception is bad, and abortion is bad....and then act all horrified that girls get pregnant. You really ought to think before pressing send on some of your posts...take a little time to think about what you are writing and ask....is this correct? Virtually every factoid or proposition you post is easily falsifiable. Don't you ever get tired of learning that reality isn't the way you think it is? My guess: no, because you aren't interested in facts, only in repeating alt-right nonsense. Prove me wrong.

Indeed. It is almost like the game is not entirely defined by simplistic numerical evaluation methods.

First, you seem to think that South should not open 2♥. If my partner did not open with a preemptive bid on that hand, I would seriously ask them if they had missorted their hand :P Passing is not an acceptable option IMO. You should never be able to open 2♣. Next, is 2♣ a reasonable bid? You have a broken 7 card suit, you are on the low end of high cards, and your suit is diamonds, not a major. I can think of an auction where this could work out well, 2♣ 2♦ 3♦ 3♥ but I can think of a lot more where the auction goes off the tracks. I would rate opening bids as: 1♦ - 100 2♣ - 40 Other - 0 What's truly ridiculous is your suggestion that the auction would go 2♣ 3♣ 3NT - Final bid I nominate that auction for the Best Bidding of the Year award.

Another awesome, thought inspiring thread by PhilG007!