csdenmark

That will do Uday

Excellent Zoltan! The feature was originally created to be some players really worth watching - ambassdors of good bridge. Disappointed I have also noticed several have no real intensions to live up to standards as frontrunners. Like you I would like to see software modified in the way so name, nationality and skill level would be displayed aut. and correct. All of those with stars have options - like anybody else - to create an ID with no "star". Using such one they have an option to choose not to apply to standards. I have stopped watching the "stars" due to this. When I notice such with 'private' or completely empty - I will report here in future. There are several. As all of the "stars" knows very well - basic of information in bridge is convention cards. I would really like to see the "stars" here to live up to their responsibility. Like Yellow feature the "stars" have accepted a responsibility of moral nature which normal persons without have the freedom to abuse.

I have no idea whether such a conv. exists. But I have played Copenhagen conv. as 5-4, either longer instead of 5-5. Ghestem is something similar. http://groups.msn.com/bridgeFILES/copenhagen.msnw

By a quick glance it looked like both you and Flame here are right. It looks like what I have interpretated as solid is more like undisciplinary action. - The informations looks a little tricky and I have not been suspicious as I think I have been lucky partner had the missing card. Looks like solid means 8+ points in the preempt suit missing only queen or jack bot not both. I also need once again compare to Namyats - in Precision preempts are something like a sub-system. As my principle is to let the others make the thinking work - it is for me only, but sometimes hard enough, only to take advantage from that. The basic is of course to interpretate correctly - and here it looks like I have been mistaken. But I need some more time to investigate. Thank you for help!

No I dont - that was really why I continued here. I dont think the explanations for such art. definitions are very precise in the book. I came in doubt caused by this discussing whether I was interpretating correctly or not. Thank you for help for now. I will try to study again and return with a solution and documentation.

There are not so much help in this area so it is a bit some personal habits deciding. I use the Belladonna/Garozzo version for Namyats: 10-14, 8 cd solid or 7 cd solid headed by ace or king -I am also using 3♦ Sharif for preempts - 9-12, any 7 solid, no ace or king -3♣ 9-13, 6-7 cd, stopper outside I will therefore open 5♣♦ holding something like you call solid.

How does your 5♣♦ openers look like? My guideline is what qualifies for Namyats in MAJOR qualifies for Gambling 3NT in minor.

Ben the problem with 1♦ opening you have max. 6 cards. If 7 you open 3NT or your general strength is much high. After 1♦ you will have a signoff in 3NT by responder in round 2. For 3♦ the diamond suit itself is much too strong. The strength must be in side suits if any. As you have seen here the tendency will be to pass 3♦ opening.

Eric - 4♦ would normally be Namyats. In this example I would be happy to bid 6♠ over your 4♦-open. Partners? 3NT is any 7 solid and this is solid. This little rule might be helpful: - Preempt in NT - an option for NT-contract is excluded - Preempt in suit - an option for NT-contract is included The action has this scheme: 3NT - Round - 4♣ = Tell suit,Round -- 4♦♥♠♣ = trump suit,NF --- New suit = CUE --- NT = CUE of trump suit - 4♦ = self-sufficient,NF - 4NT =Blackwood - 4♥♠/5♣♦ = Signoff - 5♥♠/6♣♦ = Slam force

Caren this example is a standard 3NT opener.

Precision-Belladonna/Garozzo - 3♦ Sharif - 9-12HcP,Any 7 solid, No ace or king - 3♥ Negative - no game - 3♠ Game force - http://free.hostdepartment.com/c/csdenmark/BG/BG-3D_3S.htm - 3NT - Signoff, 2+tricks, stop unbid Viking Precision - 3♦ - 7+cd, standard preempt - 3♥♠ - Natural - 4♣ - relay for suit quality --step responses --1. No ace or king --2. Ace or king --3. 2 of 3 top honors Top honors=ace,king,queen but not jack Caren as I know you also play standard systems - here the answers recommended by Bridge World: http://www.bridgeworld.com/default.asp?d=b...bwsall.html#IVC

Thank you Ben - I will pursue that. I had that suspected myself and asked one of them about he had logged in invisible. The other one I didnt ask but I wondered a bit as they both played at my table showing correct ♥. The one I asked was Bulgarian with hard language problems but a good bridge player. Belladonna/Garozzo + Beznazwy. So you understand I want to have the problem solved. I got no answer but the american I will talk with as soon he contacts me - which looks the only way here. Thank you very much.

Yesterday I had 2 who wasn't displayed in lobby. I have no filters activated at all and both country and skill level is enabled. Others from same country and with same skill level are displayed. Other reasons possible than those you have informed of?

Fritz I also think 7-8 minutes is good for bridge on BBO. I have accused the set ups for non-serious. Therefore I would like to have something for measuring. I think something like proff. level + 40% would be fair. It is a pity that many just signs up for tourneys and see them as an alternative set up for solely social play. But for all those my arguments make no sense of course. If people are satisfied just to reproduce their own mistakes I like they have the opportunity to do so. - I feel pity for them! I would very much welcome the intensions to improve. You cannot improve unless you try to - think about what you have learned from your own mistakes and try to do something different now and to get experience from that.

Yes Misho - I agree with you. The polish pass system has been a school and a good one. But I really think we ought to have more information about this system - italians are good and purely openings are insufficient to judge anything from. http://groups.msn.com/bridgeFILES/regres.msnw

Ben we really need to know what is a fair speed. A fair speed for measuring. I have asked somebody with knowledge of the time limits in proff. level to be helpful. Until now no responses. If Meckstroth has 10 minutes available for all hands in Bermuda Bowl - and I think he has but I am not sure - then it be for lunatics only to sign up for tournaments with penalties after 8 minutes. If Meckstroth only has 5 minutes for a hand - then I will with no problems accept penalties for ordinary players after 8 minutes. I therefore need a little help - guidance - for a reasonable judgement.

I advocate unclocked not because of speed but because of flexibility. The flexibility needed with many kind of occurences happening which nobody can control. All have to accept the facts. Pace is NO argument in bridge. Bridge is about carefully thoughts and really not much else. Therefore we also see bridge categorized as a 'mind-sport'.

Mauro please present the full dept from one of the openings. Then I think we a chance to see. I am very impressed of Quadri Italia system. I think it is a pity so few play that. But of course a very huge description. I was overwhelmed as I last week received the book in photocopy - double size of the book of the championsystem Belladonna/Garozzo. In italian language. Serena has been very nice and helpful and I hope soon to be able to correct the files so it will be easier for all to play this fantastic system based on loser counting. The italian tradition.

Marc the 10 boards is an example just for easy counting. 10 boards tourneys make no sense in terms of seriousity. But 10 boards will be format 2 x 5 - nothing else possible. A very fast format. The completion will surely be quicker than I stated. People who cannot wait for result. Like X-mas as we were children! Sorry. Result is up for 1 week. Marc please think of the majority. The unlucky minority with bad connections on a day - help them - dont punish them. Your last statement about plug I dont understand the meaning of - sorry!

I have learned to have much respect for the italians as innovators. As always you cannot judge purely based on openings. The continuations are much needed and the judgement of a system to be based on that. To me it looks like 3♣♦ are mostly waste. I think moving preempt of minors from 2♦ to 3♣ would be an improvement. Looks like some problems easily will occur after the 1♣ open. I like the options from Precision to be implemented: 3♦ Sharif 3NT Any 7 solid 4♣♦ Namyats But if so maybe better just to stick to Precision.

The standard completion for unclocked 10 boards will be: - The quick ones: 40-50 minutes - The standard : 70-80 minutes

Bruce I have problems to understand you. It might be very interesting to understand as your enthusiasm suggest you have a solution. I think you are right the groupings are made already in first round. But trying to keep all together for round 2 I cannot see things differently than you wait for round 2 to produce the splitting. OR? Your penalizing seems unjust to me. I will not comment until I know exactly the rules for time limits the proff's need to apply to. That will be the absolute minimum for a fair time limit for ordinary players.

Ben much confusions quick to come discussing detailed stuff across the atlantic. I downloaded the version from Dan's site. As the precision standard system by BG is was most will call superprecision it is a bit difficult. The version on Dan's site is not identic with the BG book. I really think the book is the basic also for US users as it is published in New York and today it is available - and as far as I know the only available version in US - via Amazon(where I bought) and the other big web-shop in California, Powells. Anyhow the english version I use is the version used by the italians I play with and Gerard Cohen too. The version on Dan's site I noticed differs regarding asking after 1NT/2NT openings. Also Stayman is not used in superprecision only in standard version. In superprecision it is 'ask for description' with 2 different kind of responses whether opened NT or 1D. Taking a closer look it is very likely there will be more minor differences. Fun - I was unable to find BETA. I stop here and play best possible with all who likes so. At least some chinese are interested in superprecision play I have noticed. I am sure we find an easy way for fun and communication.

Ben I dont want to argue with you. Our aims are basically the same. I made a note of the version in Precision I prefer and I use. There are a lot of other good and official versions. Jannersten's version I have heard of but dont know and I dont have his book. A problem with super-precision is the exactly same version need to be used - else it is not worth using for super-precision. OK - I have ACBL Encyclopedia, 5th edition, looks like 1994. Page 31 about BETA in Roman Club and Super Precision. Only Super Precision relevant here. Asking bids in the SUPER PRECISION system concerned with the quality of a side suit after responder has made a positive response in notrump are also sometimes called Beta Asking Bids, although the difference in schedule of responses has led them toi be designated Delta Asking Bids in the version of Super Precision used by Giorgio Belladonna and Benito Garozzo. See SUPER PRECISION ASKING BIDS. Going to that(page 486) it looks like they are mixing it up describing Gamma as Beta. Ben I am using 1 version and 1 version only. That is Belladonna/Garozzo, "Precision and Super Precision bidding", G.P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1975. I dont know what Belladonna might have changed since then - but since 1995 I know for sure - nothing. Pity he reached the end of his journey then. ---------------------------------------- For Mike - I play several versions of precision. As impossible negative is a part of precision in Goren/Wei, Cinderella Team and Goren I use it when possible when I play acc. to those versions. Mostly with american partners. ---------------------------------------- I have now added the links for the asking bids for WEB-sites. There are several modifications for repeatings. They will only come up with web-sites in those special situations they are used. http://free.hostdepartment.com/c/csdenmark/BG/BGS-Ask.htm

Luis BETA is used in several occasions. 1C-1NT-2C=ask distribution. New suit after 2D(H+a 4cd) or 2S(No 4cd) responses will be BETA ask.