silvr bull

After the above critical comments about my example, I created a thread to ask the key questions (http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/76082-what-is-your-play-in-part-3/). The comments there were even more critical, so it seems that I could have selected a better example hand for this Decision Point proposal. Needless to say, any additional comments about my example hand should be put into that thread about the hand, and not here where they distract from the Decision Point concept. The basic premise of Decision Point is valid, and the idea of giving every player identical information throughout the bidding and play would substantially reduce the amount of luck (good or bad) that is an inevitable part of current tournament formats. BBO would be an excellent venue for hosting Decision Point tournaments, and I hope BBO will give serious consideration to the Decision Point approach.

I sometimes log in as invisible, and other times as not invisible. After being logged in for a while, I do not remember which way I logged in. It would be helpful if the software displayed that status onscreen so I can see it easily. Also, I noticed that invisible is not completely invisible. After logging as invisible, I can type my user ID into the "Find member" box and a popup says I am online. If that status showing an invisible member is online is unintentional, it might be an "Area for Improvement".

A joke starts with the Lone Ranger and his faithful companion surrounded by indians on the warpath. The Lone Ranger says "Well Tonto, it looks like we will not survive this time." Tonto replies "What you mean WE, white man?" I hope there are still a few of "us" who prefer to have good values for our bids. My partner would indeed misjudge horrifically if I opened KJxxx and out with any bid in any situation. Opening 2S when the outstanding 30 HCP could have been divided more or less equally among the other three hands offers the possibility that we could bid a game when we have the right cards and fit so that it will make, but that we will stay out of game when we cannot make. That surgical approach appeals more to me than hitting the hand with a sledgehammer in my first bid. After West announces a strong hand by his jump to 4H, however, the situation changed and a 4S sacrifice seems clear. To paraphrase JFK, if I don't bid it, who? If not now, when? I added my lonely vote for 4S. The North hand and the poll 3 questions are now shown in the OP.

[hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp]133|200[/hv] The hand for Part 1 is repeated above. I selected 2S for South's bid for several reasons. If North has a maximum pass and the opps are silent, he can bid 2NT to invite game. Then South can bid 3C to show a maximum 2S hand, and a C feature, and interest in going to game even opposite North's passed hand. That would be enough information for North to bid 4S if he has an excellent fit, perhaps something like xxx {Kxxx x or x Kxxx} AKxxx. If North does not have an excellent fit, then 4S is unlikely to make and it is better to play in 3S. If South opens 1S, it will be difficult to exchange that level of information, especially if the opps interfere. If South open 3S, then there can be no information exchange and North must guess. If the hand belongs to the opps and they can make a close game, then they will have to guess well at the 3 level after a 2S opening to bid that game. If South opens 1S instead, the opps will have more bidding space to define their hands and get to the best contract. Conversely, if South opens 3S there will be less bidding space, but that may push the opps into a 4H game that would be difficult to bid if they did not need to guess. For part 2, South's opening bid is 2S. West jumps to 4H, and it is South's turn again after P, P. Should S pass or bid? The new poll questions are in the OP. [hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp2s4hpp]133|200[/hv]

This is part one of a three part set of issues with the same hand. What call do you make: P, 1S, 2S, 3S, 4S, other? Those who have seen this hand can vote, but please do not comment on this part 1 issue until part 2 is shown. BBO tournament at matchpoints. We are white and the opps are red. [hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp]133|200[/hv] Part 2 of 3: Do you bid or pass after West calls 4H? [hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp2s4hpp]133|200[/hv] Part 3: West leads the CA and then switches to the DK. You win the DA and lead the S9 from dummy. East follows low. What do you do? The poll 3 choices are (1) ride the 9, (2) play the ten, or (3) play a high S. [hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&n=s9h832da75ck87432&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp2s4hpp4sdppp]266|200[/hv]

I had the same frustration until I found the solution. In the tournament listing, click the "Running" tab (at the top). Then click the "Tables" at the right for a tourney you want to sub into. Finally, click "Substitutes" at the bottom of that table list. Then you can sign up to sub in that tournament. If you want to sub into more tourneys, repeat the procedure with each one you want to play in.

I propose a new tournament format called Decision Point (DP). The objective is to provide all players with the same information and circumstances and excellent opponents, and to compare how well each player does at selected DPs. Every player will sit in the same position in pre defined hands that were created for the DP tournament. A player's three "opponents" will not be robots (which can do different things in different situations), but will simply be scripts which present exactly the same bids or plays for every player to work with. The script requires each player's bids or plays to be the same also. That will be accomplished by having DPs throughout the bid and play of each hand. After a player selects a bid or play, the "correct" or scripted bid or play will be presented on screen instead of the one selected by the player. If that bid or play was a DP, then it will be scored as a maximum plus (if it duplicates the DP script) or a reduced amount (if it is significantly different than the DP script) for the player. Every player will play the same contracts under the same conditions with the same bridge scores, so the cards presented to the player and the opponents will not affect the player's tournament result. The DP tournament winner will be the one who chooses the most correct DPs. Here is an example hand actually played in a BBO tournament. After two passes, the player has the first bid decision. [hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp]133|200[/hv] Some players might prefer a pass, or 1S, or 3S, or 4S. If the player selects any of those actions, a "Decision Point Adjust" (DPA) alert message will flash on the screen. The player's bid will be changed to 2S (the same bid for all the tournament players), and the player's DP score would be the fractional DP point value assigned to the player's bid. If the player selected 2S, there would be no alert message, but the player's DP score would be increased by one DP point. The script would continue with 4H, P,P back to the player. Any bid other than 4S will result in a DPA message, and the player's tournament score would increase by the fractional DP point value assigned to the player's bid, but a 4S bid will increase the player's tournament score by one DP. The bidding will complete with X, P, P, P. The opening lead is the club Ace, and the player is declarer with this hand: [hv=pc=n&s=sakqt54h7dt6cjt95&n=s9h832da75ck87432&d=n&v=e&b=9&a=pp2s4hpp4sdppp]266|200[/hv] The play continues club ace, 2, 6. If the player plays the jack, or ten, or nine, there will be no alert and the player's DP score will increase by one DP point. If the player plays the 5, however, there will be a DPA alert, the player's card will be converted to the jack, and the player's DP score will reduce by one DP point. West next leads the diamond king to the ace. The trump 9 and the 2 from East gives the player another DP opportunity. If the top trump is played, there will be no alert and the player's DP score will increase by one DP point. If the player plays low or the 10, however, there will be a DPA alert, the player's card will be converted to the ace, and the player's DP score will reduce by one DP point. The player will pull trump and can play as many spades as he likes before he switches to clubs. If the player next leads a top club to the king, there will be no alert and the player's DP score will increase by one DP point. If the player leads the 5, however, there will be a DPA alert, the player's card will be converted to the ten, and the player's DP score will reduce by one DP point. This simple hand offers 5 DP points to each player. The Decision Point tournament will eliminate many forms of cheating online, but there could be one worth noting. A player could enter the tournament under two IDs. Each would see the same information, but if one could play fast to quickly cause a DPA, then the slow player would know what trap is lurking. A way to avoid that is to delay each player's bid or play by a set time (such as 15 seconds) and complete all players' actions at the same time. Alternatively, easy actions, such as pass with little value in distribution or HCP or plays with only low spot cards, could be allowed less time, but more difficult DP actions could be allotted more time. Either way, the action of every player would complete at the same time, so there would be no advantage from using multiple IDs in a DP tournament. If a player does not act quickly enough within the time allotted for a DP, then the system would make the correct decision and the player's tournament score would not increase or decrease from that DP. Decision Point tournaments would transform bridge results from random luck comparable to backgammon, to more focused skill like chess. BBO would be a great place to begin Decision Point tournaments!

Another strong value of 12-14 NT openings is that it makes life difficult and risky for the opps (as shown in this thread) and easy for responder to know what to do. Opening 1m to rebid 1 NT with 12-14 balanced, in contrast, makes it easy for the opps to overcall, and difficult for partner to know what to do until opener can clarify his hand description. I see no more reason to alert responder's pass (after a 12-14 NT open) as showing some values than to alert that I am more or less sane when I sit down to the table. Just as I would not pass with xxxx xxx xxx xxx after a 15-17 NT open (an automatic 2C takeout before LHO can double), I would not pass a 12-14 NT open with xxxx Qxx xxx Jxx. Getting out of 1 NT before the double is an obvious part of the game.

There is a persistent problem in BBO tournaments. One or two players can take so much time to bid and/or play that there is little time left for the other players. I would like to see individual clocks for each player. They would act like chess clocks to run when it is the player's turn to bid or play, and then stop for that player after completing the bid or play. Then the clock would run for the next player until that player completes a bid or play, etc. The four clocks could be visible on the screen so it would be easy to see if one player is taking too much time. Without clocks, a director who gets to a problem table near the end of time for a round can do little more than assign an average score to all players, even though only one player may have used most of the wasted time. With clocks to help identify problem players, a director can decide to assign better scores to the non offenders and worse scores to time wasters. Just seeing the clock ticking time away could help motivate slow players to play more quickly. Individual clocks would be helpful even in casual games to encourage players to waste less time. Individual clocks would be a timely improvement!

This could be a good time to remind your friend that it is good to keep a copy of all passwords where he can get to it whenever he wants. I keep mine in a spreadsheet, and I store that spreadsheet in an encrypted space. That way, I need to remember only the one password to my encrypted space, and then I can find any other password I want. I also have several backup copies of that encrypted space (along with all my other data), in case one hard drive fails. better safe than out of luck.

Pass is an easy first bid for me. Unless partner expects me to open very light, it will be difficult to plus after opening. Hands that we can make 2 on will often end at 3 (after partner invites) or higher. My philosophy is to look for early opportunities to limit my hand, and passing hands like this is an easy way to accomplish that objective. If I open this, then my future bids will focus on limiting the potential damage. If the hand is not passed out, it will be easy for me to make stronger bids later without misleading partner.

With partnership agreement, my Silver convention solves the op problem easily. After 1C-1D, and 1H 4S would be Kickback to ask for aces with Hs as trump. That leaves the jump to 4NT free to ask about trump quality. 4NT would also ask about trump honors immediately after a weak 2D or 2H, or an opening preempt of 3C or 3D or 3H (since 4S would be Kickback for H). The responses (with either C or D or H as agreed trump) would be 5C=0 (or 1 if opener has only a 3 card suit), 5D=1, 5H=AQ or KQ, 5S=A&K with no extra length, 5NT=A&K with more length than shown in the earlier bidding, and 6C=3. When S are the agreed trump suit, 4NT asks for aces, but a jump to 5C could ask for trump honors, with responses similar to the above. There is more about the Silver convention in the 2013 link below: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/59714-asking-about-trump-honors/ Good luck teaching the robot to bid Silver!

Without an advance agreement, it is frequently impossible to know what partner intended by his double. I ask each new partner, and sometimes remind partners I played with before, that I like a simple rule on doubles: If you have not bid, my double below 3NT is 100% takeout, except of conventional bids like Stayman or transfers. If you have bid, my double below 3NT is 100% penalty, except for simple negative double, or responsive double when they raise their own suit. That gives up the flexibility to use double to say I have some stuff here so you decide how to use it, but the rule gains clarity in otherwise ambiguous situations. I would expect opener to be closer to a max than a min and to have something like ♣AJTx. Assuming responder's use of Stayman is at least invitational, opener's double invites responder to double any runout the opps try to find. BTW, I prefer 12-14 NT open (with two way Stayman instead of transfers), and I too use 2C as an escape from a bad hand sometimes, but that seems misguided with the East hand here. In my preferred style, 2M or a jump to 3m is weak to play, and I would jump to 3D (for clarity, and for some preemption value) with the East hand.

The OP hand is an easy 2H open for me. If the C2 was a S2 instead (so 4=6=1=2), I would pass. We try to avoid 1st or 2nd seat preempts with a side 4 card major.

Q: Would a pass by South have been forcing? A: This specific situation was not previously discussed, but yes, a pass by S must be forcing with 12-14 NT openings. Playing 15-17 NT, S could have a balanced 13 and then a pass would not be forcing. With 12-14 NT, however, S cannot have a bad balanced opener, but can easily have a problem hand like AJxx Axx AQxx xx, or stronger by replacing x with a red Jack or two. Then S cannot guess at 3NT because N may have only a doubleton C and no stop, and S cannot guess to bid higher in Ds because N might have only a doubleton D. North must decide whether to double 3C or go to game, so S must pass the decision to N. Given that a pass by S must be forcing, then what should S do with a bad opener that has 5 or more Ds? That seems like an easy decision to me. N will either double 3C (and S can pull to a weak 3D), or bid 3D which S will happily pass, or bid 3NT which S will pass and hope for the best. With a good opener that does not want to play 3CX, S should not pass and pull a double to 3D, the same way he would with a bad opener. Instead, S can and should bid 3D immediately to tell N that he has good values with 5 or longer Ds and more than a minimum open. Q: Does a 1D open promise 4 Ds? A: Our style is to open the better minor with a strong balanced hand. With 4=4=3=2, we would open 1D. We tried promising 4 Ds to open 1D, so that we would open 1C on a 4=4=3=2, but had numerous problems when aggressive overcalls made it difficult to further describe the hand and responder did not know if opener had only 2 Cs or more.

Matchpoints. N-S open 12-14 NT, so a 1C or 1D open could preface a 1NT rebid to show a balanced 15-17, or it could be an undefined unbalanced hand. [hv=pc=n&s=saj76ha87daq852c7&n=skt3hk5dk743ck942&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1d1s2n3c3dppp]266|200[/hv] Post Mortum: North: South's bid showed weakness because it prevented North from doubling. North was surprised South bid 3D. South: 3D free bid showed extra values and 5 or more Ds. South was surprised North passed. What's your viewpoint?

We open 12-14, but the same poll choices would apply if 15-17 NT. Playing 15-17, I would open 1NT with a five card major only if it was a weak suit like Jxxxx.

[hv=pc=n&n=sakt98hkq3dkj5cj6&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=ppp1sp1n2d]133|200[/hv] Matchpoints. Good partner but unknown opps. NS vul. We play 1NT by an unpassed hand is a one round force, but is only "mostly" forcing by a passed hand. In preparation for a later "discussion" with partner, how do you view the bid choices available to North?

[hv=pc=n&s=sjt63hq9dkt53c642&w=sq5h6daqj9742cq87&n=sk82ha74d86cakj95&e=sa974hkjt8532dct3&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=3ddp3sppp]399|300[/hv] I ducked the opening H lead in hopes my HQ would be an entry to hand. Then the opps reminded me again about the power of a crossruff. :angry: After the hand, partner said I should pass 3DX. My view is that the double was OK but risky, and Lady Luck was not on our side. Thanks for the comments.

I'll be the Lone Stranger on this. I have two KISS rules that I ask my partners to agree to. The first is that a 2 over 1 is forcing to 3M. With that guide, 3S below is forward going, but not forcing: 1D - (2C) - 2S - (P) 3D- -(P) - 3S The second is that any jump by an unpassed hand is forcing, so 3S below would be forcing for me: 1D-1S 2D-3S A problem I have with treating a jump by (an unpassed) responder as invitational is a hand like AQJxxx QJx K Jxx. Either 3NT or 4S could be the best spot, but I do not want to have to mis-describe my hand just to be sure partner does not pass 3S.

Matchpoints. Both Vul. Good partner, but unknown opps. What would you do? [hv=pc=n&s=sjt63hq9dkt53c642&d=w&v=b&b=4&a=3ddp]133|200[/hv]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa432hqj2dqj9ckt3&w=skt87h4dat5cqj864&n=sj965hak86dk73c72&e=sqht9753d8642ca95&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1np2cp2sp3sppp]399|300[/hv] I did invite, but Murphy's Law is still in force. After going down one at 3S, partner informed me that I should pass 2S because I have only 11 HCP. Results improve bidding judgement. Thanks for all the comments.

Playing 12-14 NT at matchpoints with a good partner against unknown opps, is your hand worth an invitation to game? [hv=pc=n&n=sj965hak86dk73c72&d=e&v=n&b=2&a=p1np2cp2sp]133|200[/hv]

Speaking of assuming, you make many assumptions, and most of them seem hostile. You are welcome to have the last word in this exchange because I do not intend to respond to you again. A commercial used the line "Life is too short to drink bad wine." I feel the same way about corresponding with someone who does not read, but instead fills in the blanks with accusatory guesses. If you read my earlier comment " clicking my bid the first time was probably a useless thing to do", you would not have felt the need to belabor the obvious rare and improbable situation where two players in an individual have previous partnership agreements. Thank you for teaching me what I already said. You could have seen that by simply reading what I wrote. Once again, you refuse to read my comments, and simply fill in your gaps with your hostile guesses. I did not refuse to answer the first click on my bid. I gave a 100% complete and accurate answer: "No agreement, so no information." If that makes the opp or you, angry, it can only be because I did not tell the opp more about the hand than my partner could know. If you read my comments, you would see that I did give proper, complete, and accurate answers to the two questions that I was asked. If you read my comments, you would see that I was asked two different questions. The first asked me if my bid showed the other major and a minor. The second (by clicking my bid) asked me what agreements my partner and I had about my bid. Two different questions merited two different answers, but both of my answers were 100% complete and accurate. The opp may have thought his question was "What do you mean by your bid?", which is the equivalent of asking me what cards I hold in my hand. You assume (with zero justification) that I deliberately left out information that is important for deciding which poll question to answer. I did leave out information, but only because the missing details are irrelevant to the poll questions. If you read my comments, then you could also assume that they are sufficient to choose an answer, instead of subjecting me to hostile assumptions. One of the irrelevant details I did not previously include was that BBO flashed a message that said my LHO called the director. You assume (with zero justification) that my comments are exaggerations. I did not count the number of times LHO clicked my bid, but it was as fast as I could repeatedly click to close the explanation box, and non stop rapid fire for approximately 15 seconds. There may well have been more than 50 clicks before LHO decided to call the director instead. Excuse me, but I don't recall being sworn in on the witness stand to be subjected to this cross examination. No, I did not include those details because they are irrelevant to the point of posting this thread, and irrelevant to a reader deciding which poll answer to select. After LHO clicked my bid non stop for approximately 15 seconds and then quickly called the director, the director arrived at the table within two seconds, and I was booted within the next two seconds. There was literally no time to type any message to the director. There was also zero communication, which you would have known if you read my comments. If you have anything useful to add, you are welcome to do so.

My understanding of the spirit of the rules on alerting is that each player should explain the partnership understandings to the opps. When there is no understanding, however, there is no "spirit" that requires a player to tell the opps more about the hand than the partner can know for sure.