csdenmark

because a convention card is pretty much a general approach to the system. have you even thought about how much data storage you would need to describe every possible bidding sequence in the FD format? because a convention card is pretty much a general approach to the system I assume we easily agree that 20 pages are no general approach have you even thought about how much data storage you would need to describe every possible bidding sequence in the FD format? Yes - less than 1MB. Meckwell Club - maybe not the full 800 pages some think they know of - is approx. 600 KB. Bocchi-Duboin 2001(the version with most brown-sticker features) is approx. 140 KB. In a few months plastic hardrives containing 30 Giga are to be introduced for that market. The advantage of that is that it will be benefitting amateurs who have bridge as a hobby but like to compete with the professionals. Today the professionals need to strip their features to fit them for the regulators. They ought instead provide remedies for amateurs to catch up using the technology most of us are using each day. Why has anybody come to that conclusion that bridge need to be a game based on ancient rules. Oh - maybe nobody has come to that idea - it has just become so because of sleepy people.

There's another advantage in playing this way: systematics. If you play a. (1x) dbl (rdbl) pass as penalty, then it's easier to remember that b. (1x) pass (pass) dbl (rdbl) pass is also penalty. If one is to play sequence a. in a different way to sequence b, one'd have more scope to misunderstandings. I am not sure I am good enough in english language here but for me they are completely different. A RDBL is support for opening - asking for opps. to disclose their feature or disaster B RDBL is SOS takeout demand for partner

Ron you see the point in huge convention cards on paper today like you see those of Bermuda Bowl? They are in pdf format - why not in FD format?

That simply refers to that I see no point in aspiring for number two. I go for the top. Anything else will be insane in bridge and anywhere else in life I think. - As a good sportsman I certainly accept to be number 2 but my aspirations will always be higher and better. You too I assume!

Not so difficult to think of - it is mostly the compact widespread mobil phones of course which will be in line. But also pocket PC - wireless internet - you name it. Such lists and regulations will need to be updatet probably every second year. Bridge rules were created at a time where you needed books to hold information. You cannot hold libraries at a table - but today you can easily have a library in a mobil phone. I am completely sure nobody will come to the silly idea to create rules like we see them today if they were to be created from scratch today. Instead of opening for modern technology we see a still more rigid regulatory way to be used. Looking back at those 5 years I have watched Vugraph - still more conformity due to still more restrictions in order to equalize terms for all. The way to do so is to change the rules - to make them healthy. Ancient rules like those some claims WBF to be valid will let the game die. That is certainly not going to be the last victim for technological progress. I think I will be at the funeral. But I hope there within short will come some more perspective from some of those who are taking advantage from the modern technology - mainly those playing online of course.

Claus: You, DrTodd, and anyone else who wants to already have an option to play bridge without any memory aids. There is a world computer bridge championship each and every year. You can find information about it right here http://www.ny-bridge.com/allevy/computerbridge/ Go ahead. build your double dummy solver, create the ultimate bidding system, play whatever silly little reindeer games you want. However, don't expect the rest of us to redefine tounament "Bridge" because you want to play a bidding system that you can't remember... Richard - Richard - Richard. Hope you feel better after the weekend!

Justin, I believe there's a checkbox in the Convention Card options that controls whether you see the explanations of your partner's bids. So if you don't want to be tempted, turn off the option. I believe the justification for turning it on by default is that most players are not familiar with FD or the systems on the default cards. During this introductory period we're erring on the side of UI to avoid MI. No thats not the reason. The reason is as I explained earlier the problem about outdated laws and imcompetent mangement of WBF. They dont care and probably have no knowledge about online bridge. As described those 2 kinds are on decisive points very different. The rules therefore must be different too - especially they must be updated to be fit for today, which in practice is the situation as it has been for at least 10 years now. The reason for showing partners bids is thats the only real way to avoid mis-information. It is so on all playgrounds - because those are created by men keen about taking care of core values in bridge. The 3 problems are: Concealed partnerships Mis-information Memory aid are not possible to handle correct according to laws at the same time. You simply need to modify the laws. Unfortunately it is so that lawyers traditionally has never needed to care about the society they are living in. Until 5 years ago all of those in Denmark were small lawfirms only. The auditers has started merging into big companies 15 years ago and the lawyers has now started the same as it is no longer possible for them to catch up with iformation technology and education in any other way. So a little light we have - but very unsatisfactory to wait for the last ones I think. Justin is one of those who ought to know that. Many seems to have fun to show ignorance or lack of knowledge - they are not to be taken serious. ACBL(Gwen) do the right thing - to be soft on memory aid. That rule make no sense in a modern society with information technology. Neither in off-line nor in on-line.

I am very pleased to read your post Wayne. Sorry I didnt read it first time I saw because - oh you know! I think your comments nails something important - that standard systems must be rather simple, consistent and easy to use - aimed for all interested in solid social bridge without problems and misunderstandings. I would welcome BBO default cards to be modified in that way. Another important thing you point to is the ability to have an overview - a general understanding - of a system. FD does not pay much attention to that - in fact the space for that has recently been reduced. I think it is a high priority topic and I would be much in favour of some sophisticated performance regarding this. I would like to comment your last phrase Could we have a model A Ford please and let the pros drive the Ferraris? This is not and will never be my intensions. I want to drive a Ferrari because I think it is the best tool available. If the Professionals also want to take advantage from the best tools available - my choice looks like to be able to go for something. I have no interest in handicapping myself.

As far as I remember your pictured convention card is the one used on Swan Bridge. Or perhaps more correct the one they have available but dont use. It is available for anybody who signs up there. It is not loadable to a table but it is loaded on a web-site to which you can point via a web-site link in prealert. I think we will agree it is not going beyond opening + initial response. The problem is people want full system descriptions. They will do nothing for it themselves. As soon they detect somebody has done the job they claim violation of rules due to memory aid. Barmar who started this thread wanted explanations to be continued for a default card deeper than openers rebid. This means at least 2 steps deeper than ordinary convention cards. I think you have modified your post Richard - I think it would have been unable for me not to have seen this big image in your post.

Responder is captain and I prefer no mistakes risking wrong harbour. Puppet Stayman please. Suppose you play that 2NT-3H-3S does show 2-card Spade (or less) and opener would bid 3NT with 3-card spade or cue with support and a good hand. Would that change your plan? I don't. 3♠=3+♠, 3NT=2♠. But it is always Stayman so I will never come close to your question.

Claus - There is a VERY big difference between what i am suggesting and the bulk of your postings. Your posting have always focused on authority and force. The ACBL or the WBF or BBO or whatever must REQUIRE the use of Full Disclosure. I'm arguing quite the opposite. First and foremost, I noted that organizations like the ACBL and the WBF don't enforce convention card regulations in face-to-face events. These groups have a much more formal presence in the face-to-face venue. Players treat the game much more seriously. And still, the organizations don't do anything. Its laughable to believe that these groups will suddenly start to enforce these types of norms in the wild and wooly world of online bridge. In short, I may have mentioned force as a possibility, but I don't believe for a moment that this will ever happen. The bulk of my posting focus on education system and trying to ensure that consumers start to recognize the benefits associated with standardization. This approach is diametrically opposed from your typical rants. The ACBL or the WBF or BBO or whatever must REQUIRE the use of Full Disclosure No - They must enforce the basic of their laws to be obeyed - this means that concealed partnerships are unacceptable. Using FD or any alternative I care less but FD and ZONE cc are elegant relation database tools. They are both well suited for the job. In short, I may have mentioned force as a possibility, but I don't believe for a moment that this will ever happen For ACBL it is enforced but they have not required the remedies or they may have been turned down to be able to see to their rules to be applied automatically. The day that happens my guess will be it will be the end for all tournies laizzes faire on disclosure. The bulk of my posting focus on education system and trying to ensure that consumers start to recognize the benefits associated with standardization. This approach is diametrically opposed from your typical rants No it is not - it is in fact exactly the same. I advocate that 95% of the players need nothing else than default cards. Only bad will is the reason for the low user rate. I also advocate that players can only play systems for which they have tools available for disclosure. I would very much welcome BBO to modify software to see the stars would be shining stars preventing them from playing with stars using cencealed partnership agreements.

I think it will be no news Richard I applaud your comments here. I have been advocating this for a year now and until december last year you have always opposed. You are very welcome of course. You are not completely right that nobody cares. Some cares - but I dare not publicly point to them. I hope you can find them yourself. But ordinary users are not keen about the memory aid problem and I think they are right so. It is the solution for ACBL(Gwen) and it is going to be the way for rules to be modified. The sooner the better if WBF intend to avoid to be undermined. We will have enhancements for FD as soon the user rate is going to exceed 60%. Until then we have to accept persons claiming good computer skill levels in general but novices if they are asked to invest time for learning.

1♥ RDBL is unacceptable contract. That makes game score for 7 tricks. I pass for weak if it is agreed forcing else I need to take action myself.

Did you know that VAT was invented 1754/1755 by Earl Brühl in saxonia? Like any idea that makes money, it was copied worldwide. Never heard of Saxonia I looked it up at Wikipedia. Saxonia was the first locomotive in Germany, 1838. Influence of it had Anton Schubert. Doubt very much this has much to do with VAT. But the VAT idea has successfully been implemented, maybe until exhaustion, for the creation of welfare states. Please remember VAT also serves as an important tool for proper handling of currency policy of all nations.

You are assumed to know what you have agreed - thats the simple answer. FD has 2 options which it is able to serve: Convention card - Opening + initial response is normal and sufficient for that System description - deep as possible of course What to be preferred depends really about in which way you will accept ordinary bridge rules to be violated. There is no good solution to that until World Bridge Federation will be able to acknowledge that their rulings based on lack of knowledge about modern information technology is harmful to lovers of the game.

In the example which I have put up I think this will be correct: 1X (1Y) P (P), P=To play, minimum 1X (1Y) P (P), DBL=NOT to play, basically for Lebensohl 1X (1Y) P (P), DBL (P) 2♥=Lebensohl, Signoff 1X (1Y) P (P), DBL (P) 3♦=Lebensohl, Transfer, 10+cP 1X (1Y) P (P), DBL (P) 3NT=Lebensohl, Stop OK

Certainly not. If overcallers partner passes holding a weak 6+♠ then opener just need to take action. I would recommend Lebensohl. I really think the wise bid is pass. Overcaller side will never be able to pass the hand out but you are in great danger of missing your game - bidding too quickly in darkness. As the initially responses point to - forcing or not? This is the real advantage of canape' overcalls.

Here we are dealing with, as done several times before, with the basic indiscrepances of outdated bridge laws. WBF is to blame for that and nobody else. It would be wise to address that organization. To rally the probably only tournament organizer on BBO with intensions to obey those laws makes no sense. They have to deal with indescrepances between: Concealed partnership Mis-information Memory aid The salomonic solution ACBL has chosen is to be soft on memory aid giving priority to the 2 other. Please be free to argue for a different prioritation to the problem. Such will make sense but will not solve the problem. If you want to do something about the problem you must address the persons responsible for the mess. Those are not online and have no knowledge of the real problem. Therefore they have no legitimazy. Sad to say - even for offline bridge they seems unqualified. They need to come up with revisions for taking advantage of modern information technology.

Frank I think you ought to reconsider the comments in this thread. One of the first ones was by Whereeagles. Another important one is Hotshot I think. They will do good to you I think. 1♣, 10-21HcP, 5-4 dist./11-16HcP 4441 dist is a weak feature. Here you are very vulnerable to interference 1♦, 6+cards is waste of important space You need hammers It is a sign you dont trust your own baby falling back to standard over interference. They do so in Viking Precision. So despite they have a very complicated relay structure it is mostly a very simple system to play. Opps. will quickly learn how to force you off track.

No it is not useless - in fact it is so that players are informed of and has an opportunity to learn better the system they thought they knew. OK I know there are a few bugs in default cards - I dont understand why they are not corrected. In general just load your FD - alert and explain where there are differences. But please remember FD discloses your agreements and not your actual holding. It would be nice to have software modified in that way that if a bid is alerted and explained manually - then that explanation would take priority to general explanation of FD. Thats the way it works on ZONE.

I don't know exactly how it works but for your possible further explorations about how to handle such I will inform you that I have seen a tool for clocking has been added on JBridge.

EU is no great project. It is in fact an outdated project. The economic I support, certainly not the currency politic, but I need to remember you about it was established mainly for protecting old agricultural structures begging Germany for further transferrings as they were assumed to feel guilty and had the economic power to do so - with good help from the americans. Thefore it was created as a community for free trade inside custom barriers. Not so proud an approach I think. The wheel really fell off as they switched focus from economy into political coordination. I know of course the option for that has been there from the very beginning. I certainly acknowledge that legislation and general political standards has been improved regarding new memberstates. Unfortunately it is pity to see old problems popping up now in Hungary, Czecky and Poland. I think the only countries of the last new members which have adopted western values as a whole are Slovenia and partly the baltics. I am in doubt why I feel secure that we will see no more military coups in Europe - but anything preventing such is with no doubt justified.

To me it looks like the EU project is not fit for the future. The need for security, stability and reconciliation is in fact the NATO project. I think they have nothing else to do today. Thats what the new EU-memberstates are looking for and they will not find that in EU. The economic project Bruxelles has never been able to address in a qualified manner. The memberstates themselves set their agendas and others try to look for good examples, right now they will be wise to look north. The solidarity with the problems the old world has created is difficult for me to find in EU. Maybe the imagination will be doing something positive. I dont care as long as we share some of our advantages with them. The real challenge will be topics rarely addressed, Asia and environment. Sad to say it looks like Bruxelles has no real role to play here. I have read that Angela Merkel's agenda for her 6 months will be the constitution project and environment. I wish her all good luck with the latter. The first is a pure loser option.

I really dont know. I think it will be wise to pass the overcall and wait for the feature to be disclosed. Then you via Lebensohl will have excellent options for continue - even better than those you had without interference.

Correct it does not necessarily mean 2 suits. Overcall suit is 2nd best suit(2-4 cards). The options for distribution are 4♥+4♠ or 5+♣♦♥ with a possible side feature in ♠. As is normal for canape' bidding it is forcing. After intervention from the opener side it is certainly no longer forcing but natural. This therefore means pass will be an option and DBL responsive. For your information the italian top pair Bocchi/Duboin employed canape' overcalls over natural 1♣♦ openings until 2005.