csdenmark

Referring to the old quick trick counting? ---------------------------------------- In my book by Slawinski/Ruminski "Introduction to weak opening systems" they are operating with a term called 'aggressiveness'. Anybody who knows what that term means? They also have a figures for several of the systems: Regres - Mean opening 2.19 BezNazwy - Mean opening 2.18 Lambda - Mean opening 2.09 Antidelta - Mean opening 2.32 Sigma - Mean opening 2.47 Big Beat - Mean opening 1.92 Delta - Mean opening 1.8 Beta - Mean opening 2.09 As I understand it means something like the higher the figure the more aggressive the system is. Anybody who really knows about this? Anybody who knows how to construct such calculations?

Me too

Give it a little careful thought - then I certainly hope you will reach the right conclusion.

Not sure you are the only one - but sure you are one of the few ones. You decide yourself whether you want to take advantage of this excellent option. Awful to see so many clumsy players seems unable to play their singletons.

A perfect hand for strong pass systems, especially Regres! 1♣ = 8-12HcP, Any hand with shortness

You have signed up for a tourney where convention card is mandatory. So your opps. must have one loaded. As BBO does not support enforcement of cc I see ACBL need to rely on opps. to report missing convention cards. You have been informed of that. As far as I have understood ACBL no really strange systems are allowed, I think I remember they state something like level 2 systems. Looks therefore like a restricted system has been used. Claiming so - I assume your claim would have been accepted.

I certainly dont know exactly why some can access the site and I am prevented from that. I have default settings for Internet Explorer with the exception that I have checked a few extra boxes regarding pop-up blocking. As the scriptfaults are reported by Internet Explorer - which as standard ignores harmless scriptfaults - then the 2 ones reported must be serious. As I receive a warning sign and is prevented from entering that site indicates Drivecleaner is assumed to be high risk zone. There are 3 options to be blocked. Via add-on, via phising-filter, via pop-up blocker. I see the phising bar is moving when I enter a site but it would be logic to check something before entering. I think it is therefore the most likely option that Drivecleaner is caught by phising-filter.

No Drivecleaner is not innocent here. I have reported 2 serious scriptfauls by Drivecleaner and also reported that my security settings not only warns me entering but completely disables my options to do so. Therefore Drivecleaner is not harmful to me - they are in fact completely harmless. But I would say they are some kind of fools. With solid security settings it will produce nothing for them and is pure waste of money. They simply need to look over their programming features.

http://online.bridgebase.com/prod/ads/location2.html This one produces nothing but text cyclus. http://online.bridgebase.com/prod/ads/location1.html This one did the same but once I was lucky Drivecleaner commercial turned up. Then nothing more happened. No message of any kind of blocking. As the Drivecleaner commercial came up I noticed a yellow triangel at the bottom of left corner. I dont know what it means as no text came up setting pointer to it.

Uday you dont need to do anything special to my used ID. I care very little about commercials and I think I have fairly good proctection levels. I clicked your link. It opened in a new window, not in a tab-window. There were some text from World Bridge - 15 seconds or so - then text came again. After 3-4 times it changed to ACBL text. Oh - if it is targetting non-english I may not be good for testing as I use IE7 downloaded in USA and english version. I have just read today that it will take approx. 3 months until all local versions of IE7 will be aut. distributed. From what I read from help-topic about pop-up blockers it ought to display a message bar if a site has been blocked. I think it is therefore likely that nothing has tried to pop-up by me here. Nothing else happened.

YES - it is default browser. I use Internet Explorer 7 downloaded 3 weeks ago from original Microsoft web-site. The other part of your comment I don't understand else I would gladly help with a test. You mean Adds-on? Phising Filter? Popup-Blocker? I have tried to see if I had drivecleaner anywhere as enabled/disabled but looks not so. As I still have Google pop-up blocker on 255 it must have been IE which has blocked.

I tried to log in to see if I was to provoke anything to come up. I may have high security settings because even this BBO Forum WEB-site I needed to allow manually for script. I received these 2 screenshots: http://bridgefiles.net/Picture/popup.1.jpg http://bridgefiles.net/Picture/popup.2.jpg In script error Adgang nægtet is danish meaning access denied. I accepted to continue in both cases - and then nothing more happened. ACBL commercial on BBO to be seen

I think it now is about 2 years ago I last had a pop-up. I have pop-up blocker in Internet Explorer turned on and I can see I have 255 pups blocked by Google pop-up blocker. Those pop-ups which need Active-X support I deny that option. I will not accept such stuff. Decent commercials I can accept but I am interested in none of them. What I am interested of I search for myself. Maybe this example might be a support for my plea for a premium service option!

Many people think Bridge is a "speed" game rather than a thinking game. They mostly don't know what to think of There are many who use complex unusual systems and get good results. They think its their skill or system superiority. In reality its because most opps are unfamiliar with that system and don't know the correct dedfence or inferences. Correct - but who to blame for that? They think its their skill or system superiority. I doubt anybody will disagree that limit openings gives an advantage to those playing such.

The problematic bid here is not the 3♥ rebid by North but that South missed to show game going values bidding 2♥. 3♥ shows nothing than this is acceptable for compete. It is a signoff. 4♣(bypassing 3NT) will be invite(if favorable vuln. it would be signoff as sacrifice). With basic methods you will normally DBL 2♦ overcall. In more advanced methods you will bid: Pass(Inverted doubles) 2NT(Lebensohl) 3♦(Any Game Force) 3♠(ASK stop)

The fact is probably a significant number over 80-90% of people playing together may have never played together before. A real problem - unfortunately never addressed. Now they are going to have a place for that and I hope very much this will be a great success. Let's insert some realism, bridge is supposed to be fun for the majority of people that play. I am now guessing that for any that are playing for fun We all play for fun. For the vast majority, referring to the directors in link from this thread, they dont even have knowledge of a basic system. Thats not fun for me and I think I cannot recall any other sport where the participants are happy with basic only. I have never and will never advocate those I am not interested to share my life with to be banned in any way. There are and must be room for all. I have therefore started to advocate for a premium service option. I think such will be a good solution to all. Your continual attempts to make this into your perfect world is becoming tiresome. You have an opt out here - so I think I dont need to care

No - the real problem is that use of convention cards in general and especially the use of FD has never been promoted. We have a great interface on BBO but the general moral standard is for each person completely to decide for himself. Poor standards are accepted as good enough.

Me too :D

Choose more intelligent opposition next time.

I wasn't sure about the right way to rule in these sorts of cases, so I sent a hypothetical off to the Bridge Laws mailing list. This generated a fairly long thread which is still ongoing. As is often the ways with these sorts of discussions, the trhead has wandered a bit, however, folks might still find it useful http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml...ber/030017.html I have been reading much of the info from this interesting thread. I dont know where it ends, I am not used to this interface and dont know what blml-online bridge is. I have no idea in what capacity the participants rules. I understand the rules are not exactly clear and that L40 is about concealed agreements and L75 about misinformation. I understand it is difficult to separate and that plans are to modify rules merging L75 and L40. I understand from the discussion that only a few of the persons knows FD where info is pupping up. If so then there seems to be no doubt of culpa. In that respect it seems like the participants agree that FD intensions is a major step forward. I noticed that one participant assumed it would be rather simple to build bridge rules into an online tool. Maybe so - very interesting. I was very pleased to see the frank language correct naming violations of L40 and L75 as cheating. In general I wonder the intensions of all those persons discrediting the most advanced bridge tool on internet! Do you really think negative attitudes are encouraging for Fred to improve free top-level service to you?

There is no point in pressing alert button for all bids but I think if you prefer such your opps. will gladly please you doing so. Right there are sometimes problems with FD to load. A re-load handles this problem immediately. A very interesting approach to the topic 'providing false information'. I am not expert in quoting the laws but I assume Richard has the relevant sequences present.

Claus, you need to get over this obsession with forcing people to behave they way you think they should. I'm sympathetic to your end. I want the Full Disclosure application to be widely adopted on BBO. However, I find your posting on the subject offensive. Think how folks who are a bit more skeptical about the application will feel when you try to shove this down their throats... From my perspective, three major things will need to happen before the FD application takes off. 1. The FD application needs to get integrated into different education programs. In turn, this will requires targetting the folks who are running the BIL, the ACBL's education programs, and the like. This small group of decision makers is the key leverage point in the whole system. 2. You need some mechanism by which professional authors who are promoting bidding systems can generate a revenue stream selling FD files. For example: The Bridge World might decide that it wants to create an FD file that can only be accessed by current subscriber's to the Birdge World. In a similar fashion the EBL might want to document Standard English. Steve Robinson might want to create a definitive document describing Washington Standard. 3. The FD application is very obviously a 1.0 release. Don't get me wrong. This is a wonderful program. Its lightyears ahead of anything else out there. However, it needs to be made much easier before folks are going to use it. In particular, I suspect that the system is going to need a GUI of some kind. Long term, I suspect that you're going to want to create one or more graphical convention cards. For example, the ACBL card would look a lot like http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:M-6iBQM3r8w-EM:http://biomass.to/mycroft/bridge/Kontrast/K2.png Individuals could customize their convenion card by clicking on radio buttons to add or subtract conventions from a given core. Right now, the FD applicaiton is primarily used by a fairly small and technically savy group of players. I think that these changes would accelerate the diffusion of the technology into the core of the user base. However, even if you make these changes, its going to be a lengthy process... Richard have I said anything else that complimenting ACBL for running tournaments where convention card is mandatory? I think not. The problem arise here because it must have been the old format of convention card which has been loaded simply because FD would have alerted properly. As I said - the problem would never be there if BBO had fully supported the intensions of ACBL. I have therefore asked in this thread for ACBL to contact Fred to see that immediate steps to be taken to enforce general use of convention. Some days ago I concluded I doubt it will be so until there will be a Premium Service option for which I think will be unthinkable without convention card, penalty cards etc. Default convention cards for FD there are plenty of. I think BBO offers 7-8 for free, bridgeFILES offers 2 for free and 40 for sale. - So Richard there are no excuse for failures here. We simply need to exclude players who are not interested to apply to bridge rules for good manners - in the same way as ACBL does.

FD loaded - all bids are alerted and explained. The only problem you have is that opps. still play gigolo-bridge. MUST be stopped.

No I am not Peter. I think the player here is the lazy one. It is good he did not ask for score modification - such would have been ridicoulos. I think time is for ACBL and others to put pressure on Fred to see to have this enforcement option for FD installed. Cannot be quick enough.

My position is that I agree with TD here. Neither I have any sympathy with persons who dont care about what they are up against. Opps.' mistakes cannot justify your own failure. It is a great shame that the excellent tool FD still after 1 year available is nearly not used at all. I dont understand why it is still not possible to enforce use of FD for alerts. Then your problems would never arise. But I think we are only a little handful of persons who seems to be serious about bridge and how to handle. Most seems only to wake up when the problems are hitting themselves. I think you ought to act according to this: "Whenever in doubt - ALERT" "Whenever in doubt - ASK" Then life will be much easier - and especially according to rules and good standards.