32519

Japan investigating closure of BitCoin exchange

FaceBook throws in the towel on email

Not sure if 3♦ should be 3♥ here. Check out this link on Transfer Walsh. Here is an extract: "With four-card support, it is normal to accept the transfer at the 1 level holding a minimum hand, giving a jump overcall (for example 2♥ after a 1♦ response) with a maximum. One can jump even higher, to 3 or even 4 according to the strength of the hand, but only holding the mentioned four-card support. With three-card support the transfer is always completed at the 1 level, with less than three-card support another natural response is given." Manudude03 seems to be following the higher level of accepting the transfer. Anyone prepared to accept the transfer on level-4 as the article suggests is possible?

Playing Transfer Walsh, what is South's second bid here? [hv=pc=n&s=sak52hak63d3ck943&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1cp1d(Transfer%20Walsh)p]133|200[/hv] South has a nice hand here with the top two hearts?

Bitcoin exchange goes dark

Sorry, the OP has been amended. Acol plays a weak NT (12-14), so how does Acol treat the 4441 hand (any singleton). Playing standard you are normally OK. Open in a minor, if partner replies in your singleton, often you can still bid a second suit on level 1. When your singleton is ♠ and partner bids it, you can bid 1NT to show 12-14 or rebid in the lower minor. Acol can't rebid 1NT (as standard bidders can) as that would show 15-16 HCP. How about opening 1NT with 4441 (any singleton) with 12-14 HCP? Do any Acol players do that? The two treatments that I am really intrested in are these: 1. A 12-13 HCP 4441 hand (any singleton). This must surely be awkward for the Acol players. 2. A 4441 hand and exactly 15 HCP? With 16 you can possibly reverse? I am really interested in how Acol treats these awkward hands.

How does Acol bid the 4441 hand pattern, with the singleton anywhere? Break your answer down into three parts: 1. 12-14 HCP 2. 15-16 HCP 3. 17+ HCP (This post has been edited.)

The OP had a question: Please suggest a better auction, a better way to reach the optimal contract.

Kite flying

Last time I heard the North Sea oil and gas supply had started dwindling?

How about another dumb idea? [hv=pc=n&s=sak95hak86dqt98c2&w=sqt4hq973dj5ca986&n=sj832hj54da64cj74&e=s76ht2dk732ckqt53&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1dp1sp4c(Splinter)p4sppp]399|300[/hv] Making these sort of splinter bids when you have no idea of responders actual hand strength and distribution. There has to be a better way to reach the optimal contract? Here declarer loses 1 trick in each suit.

Bridge also has "some physical effort." Every time I sit East/West in a Mitchell movement, it takes "some physical effort" to get to the next table.

How does the auction continue after the one round force?

Crazy price tag fuels bubble fear

Playing in the Main Bridge Club on BBO, a random pickup partner had Precision in his profile. So we agreed to play Precision. A couple of boards later you are dealt the hated 4441 hand pattern with 17 HCP. This falls into the definition/requirement for a Precision 1♣ opener. Question: What is your recommendation for threating these big 4441 hands?

How about the stupidity of fox-hunting being declared a sport? When does the fox win? Or how does the fox win? And when it does win, who crowns it?

Nah, it must be American grid-iron. These weenies play with crash helmuts and all sorts of body padding.

I ran 250 hands through BBOs deal generator with the following constraints; Dealer = South, 4441 distribution, 16+ HCP, no constraints on the other three hands; to get an idea of the HCP spread between the three remaining hands every time opener has the 4441 hand pattern with 16+ HCP: These are the numbers – HCP NR. ODDS % 0-3 27 10.800% 4-7 108 43.200% 8-11 88 35.200% 12+ 27 10.800% 250 100.000% 0-7 135 54.000% 8+ 115 46.000% 250 100.000% The ranges were chosen with the following in mind: 1. Every time opener has exactly 16 HCP and responder has 0-3, the opponents have the majority of the HCP 2. Every time opener has exactly 16 HCP and responder has 4-7, our side has equal or the majority of the HCP but a tad short of combined game values 3. Every time opener has exactly 16 HCP and responder has 8-11, our side is in GF territory (pretty much equivalent to a Precision 1C opener and a positive response from partner) 4. Every time opener has exactly 16 HCP and responder has 12+, our side must be entering slam zone whenever the combined HCP are held in the right combination Because the aggregate of the 0-7 HCP range (54%) is slightly higher than the 8+ HCP range (46%), I am considering reverting back to my original idea, where, in the following bidding sequence – 2D-2M-2NT-3C 2NT shows the 4441 hand pattern, and 3C shows 0-7 HCP After 3C, the continuation bidding becomes Baron, with both partners bidding 4-card suits up the line in search of the first 4-4 fit. Zel’s suggestion leads to much more constructive auctions whenever responder has 8+ HCP. I have posted this here to get some help and suggestions from you guys.

I’ve been doing some reading on “System Policies” on the WBF website. Paragraph 2.3 deals with “Classification of Systems.” This is what it says for a system classified as Red: Red Artificial: this category includes all artificial systems that do not fall under the definition of Highly Unusual Methods (HUM) systems [see definition below], other than Strong Club/Strong Diamond systems (see ‘Blue’). Examples would be a system where one club shows one of three types - a natural club suit, a balanced hand of a specific range, or a Strong Club opener; or a system in which the basic methods (other than the no trump range) vary according to position, vulnerability and the like; or a system that uses conventional 'weak' or 'multi-meaning' bids (with or without some weak option) in potentially contestable auctions, other than those described in the main part of the WBF Convention Booklet. [so if I can get my system classified as “Red” seems like I can play this bid freely under WBF regulations? How would “Red” stand up in the EBU or ACBL?] Paragraph 2.4 deals with “Brown Sticker Conventions and Treatments.” This is what paragraph a says: The following conventions or treatments are categorised as ‘Brown Sticker’: a) Any opening bid of two clubs through three spades that: i) could be weak (may by agreement be made with values below average strength) AND [32519 says, note the word “AND”] ii) does not promise at least four cards in a known suit. EXCEPTION: The bid always shows at least four cards in a known suit if it is weak. If the bid does not show a known four card suit it must show a hand a king or more over average strength. (Explanation: Where all the weak meanings show at least four cards in one known suit, and the strong meanings show a hand with a king or more above average strength, it is not a Brown Sticker Convention.) EXCEPTION: a two level opening bid in a minor showing a weak two in either major, whether with or without the option of strong hand types containing 16 high card points or more, or with equivalent values. Defensive measures are permitted for opponents as in 6 below. Things are looking decidedly good so far, because whenever the hand is weak it meets the requirements of paragraph (a) with flying colours: when weak, the suit is always diamonds, and the suit has a minimum of six cards in it. No problem. So now we need to assess if the three strong hand patterns pass the Brown Sticker test as set out by the WBF. Here is their test: Quote: “If the strong meanings show a hand with a king or more above average strength, it is not a Brown Sticker Convention.” Here two of the three strong hand patterns pass the test with flying colours i.e. 1. A 4441 hand pattern with 16+ HCP 2. A big 5/5 hand pattern in the minors with 14+ HCP 3. 6/4 hand pattern in the majors, 10-15 HCP At first glance the third hand pattern fails the test. Ah, not so fast. Look at that quote again: “If the strong meanings show a hand with a king or more above average strength, it is not a Brown Sticker Convention.” SO THE HINGE TO THIS BID OF MINE NOT BEING DECLARED AS BROWN STICKER NOW DEPENDS ON THE WBF DEFINITION OF, “IT MUST SHOW A HAND A KING OR MORE OVER AVERAGE STRENGTH.” Paragraph 2.1 describes what an average hand is. This is what it says – Average Hand – a hand containing 10 high card points (Milton Work) with no distributional values I’ve underlined it for you. Read it again, “with no distributional values.” Bingo! There you have it. A 6/4 hand pattern (and that in the majors) is decidedly distributional, and decidedly provocative for the opponents. To summarise: For every event run by the WBF I can play this convention – 1. In a system classified as Red, or 2. Any system as it passes the Brown Sticker test by the proverbial country mile.

Agh please man! Who plays transfer bids opposite a weak NT? By far more popular is to play 2♣ as game invitational Stayman, 2♦ as game forcing Stayman, with 2♥ and 2♠ natural.

There yer go all you wannabe self-proclaimed experts. I've given this guys post an upvote. :)

You're also missing the point. In the second hand, move the ♥Q (or ♥K) into the East hand and 2♥ makes. Say you are playing in a team-of-4 match and your team has reached the knockout stages. There is one board left to play and the two teams are neck-and-neck, who goes through all hinges on the result of the last board. You are in the open room with the hand in the OP, partner transfer to ♥ and you super-accept going down 1 in 3♥. In the closed room the opponents are more disciplined, the transfer is done into 2♥, passed all round and made. How do you intend defending yourself before your very angry teammates in the closed room? A dumb bridge idea got your side eliminated!

I think all of you are missing the gist of my post. When partner has a bust (as in hand 2) you are just gifting the opponents the plus score with your super-accept. When partner's hand has life, he can invite by lifting 2M to 3M. With a reasonable hand as in the OP, partner can bid 3NT as a choice of places to play. Unfortuneately, as already pointed out, on the actual hand 3NT scores worse than 4♥. That's all part of the game.

Lets scrutinise these two posts a little closer: This is what the OP says – I have copied this part of the OP for emphasis… What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history? In post 6 I was replying to others who had introduced religion into the thread. Religion possibly has had/will have the most profound effect on world history. The actions of humans has DELAYED the outcome which the Elohim of the Jews has GUARANTEED! In post 29 I replied to Onoway’s post 24, maybe a bit sick but not entirely off-topic. Post 41 is off-topic and has now been deleted to keep all of you happy. In post 54 I was replying to your post 52. In post 58 I was replying to your post 55. I stand by them all. All of them are on-topic, “What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history?” New evidence keeps on surfacing that humans were involved in a well orchestrated campaign to denounce Yehoshua as the Messiah. When that failed, new evidence keeps on surfacing that humans were involved in corrupting the original message. If Yehoshua was a false messiah as claimed, all these humans needed to do was to ignore him altogether. Anything that is false inevitably dies alongside the creator thereof. Few live past the age of 90. By simply ignorning this new religious fanatic, the sect he was creating would have died within the space of 90 years. Now 2000 years later, humans are responsible for annexing many of the originators teachings, panel-beating their own version and interpretation out of those teachings, before re-launching them as a new sect. One of those sects is labelled Christianity (in whatever disguise it is advertised, be it Roman Catholic, protestant, Baptist etc). Another off-shoot is Islam. All three (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) have their roots from the Jews, who are humans. For emphasis, I have copied this part of the OP a second time… What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history? The actions of humans (as outlined above) has resulted in unnecessary religious wars and the deaths of who knows how many millions? All still on-topic and nothing to do with religion in isolation.

Folks, its doing away with super-accepts altogether. How is the opener supposed to differentiate between the hand in the OP and this one? [hv=pc=n&s=sqt9haj95dkqjcqj5&w=sa86hkq32dt52ca97&n=sj3ht8764d43ckt42&e=sk7542hda9876c863&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1n(15-17%20HCP)p2d(Transfer)p]399|300[/hv] If West passes in tempo, by super-accepting you have just succeeded in getting your side into an even higher unmakeable contract. The defence is going to win 6-tricks, 2 in ♠, 2 in ♥, 1in ♦, and 1 in ♣. What's the point of gifting away points to the opponents?