Gerardo

What is the Greek method?

HB

Not sure what that message means, but the older software is a Windows application. You need a way to run Windows Apps in your Mac (don't know much about Mac, but look for Parallels, VirtualPC or even Wine).

you're the only one i've seen posting here who has admitted that definitions aren't important (unless, i suppose, they're yours) no winston, that is *not* "all this really does"... the statement (axiom) itself is true, do you agree? Oh Gödel! This is not necessarily true.

Well, for that you have Nigel Short in Chessgames. I still prefer Shipov, as commentator.

Better one Sergey Shipov @ Chess Network Translated from Russian, though.

Should carriers be allowed to act (charge/manage/throttle/whatever) based on what kind of payload do they carry? Or not? If they do, in what circumstances?

Sure we do. At consumer levels, bandwidth is major price differential.

IIRC, Lavazza have issues with Fantoni-Nunes since they lost BB QFs with South Africa, in 2007.

hb Ron

Happy birthday!

Proper spanish use an inverted interrogation or exclamation mark at the start of the sentence.

It uses the preferred language for content of your browser. Can be forced by adding ?lang=xx to the BBO client URL.

There was early this morning, since fixed.

I believe the condition for a number to appear is to be able to make more than 6 tricks in the given denomination.

I tried it in Debian, amd64, 0.8.6, masquerading itself as 10.1.999, it didn't work (not BBO, not youtube either). Might be flashblock, noscript or being 64-bit getting in the middle, this is just first glance. Would love to make it work, still bitten by FP-40 in 64 bit.

That may be not enough. If there is a network issue between your location and BBO servers, you would be affected no matter how big your local pipe is. These kind of issues are rare, but not unheard of.

Assuming XIMP, taking out the extremes is problematic. How do you calculate the score for said extremes? You have to use a different method. Plus, assuming a result is such an outlier, the fact the IMP scale is logarithmic gives some protection, normal scores won't get much of it (compared to what the other normal scores get out of it, that is.) It needs to compare across the field, though, if you section it then it would be a huge difference.

. On OKB they USE (see, I do not use the word AVERAGE) the scores of 52 pairs to make results for everyone else, and the top 2 and bottom 2 are not counted for the calculation of the results of the other 48 pairs, but they are for the 4 extremes, see I didnt use AVERAGE again. You had two points in the initial post: [*] The number of boards for comparison, which I didn't touch. I agree, I think I higher number could be better, though Helene comments about first impressions may be relevant. [*] Why not eliminate top and bottoms, which I explained it is just not applicable to the way scores are calculated. As far as I know, I stuck to this subject. Also, XIMP vs Butler is completely relevant to this argument, no matter how much you claim otherwise. On the quoted post, You either claim they use Butler, as you claimed in the initial post (then, no matter how much you avoid the WORD average, the CONCEPT average is implied in its process), or they use two different ways (one for extremes, other for the rest), as you claimed later. You claim you know about this, however you were so far unable to provide a coherent answer when called upon it. Agree with you, this is leading nowhere. Also, I'm bored of pointing flaws in your logic, and it is pointless if you are unable to acknowledge them. Interesting how you assumed Luisa was talking about you when she said nuisance.

sigh, you are very stubborn, if you dont want to solve problems, then don't respond please, you know perfectly well what I mean, if I don't use the right lingo does not mean you should insist to discuss averages. The point is 2 pairs score an odd result this affects the rest of the scores and it should not, also to make a score from 16 pairs in the largest field on the planet is absolutely ridiculous, I expect this at the local club, not in a place where as many as 17000 players are online at the same time. On OKB they USE (see, I do not use the word AVERAGE) the scores of 52 pairs to make results for everyone else, and the top 2 and bottom 2 are not counted for the calculation of the results of the other 48 pairs, but they are for the 4 extremes, see I didnt use AVERAGE again. So, according to you, OKB uses a way to calculate the score for a set of tables(the extremes), and other way to calculate the score for everybody else? Are you authoritative on this, or can provide documentation?

There is a file named bbover.ini in BBO directory. In there, there is a line BROWSER_TYPE= something. Put an E (for External). I think it should work, but not sure.

Happy birthday!

if 16 pairs play of which 14 play 4S, 1 goes down 1, 13 makes and 1 pair plays 7NT XX down 5 and another 2S+2, I do NOT score zero when I make 4S, on every board you play on BBO you either get an undeserved big plus or an undeserved big minus if you score average, because some idiot claims down 13 or plus 7 Nor you should, being the extreme result 7NTxx down 5 or 5H x down 3.

Thought your point was about friends/enemies lists, at least on this thread.

What average? There is no average.