Lovera

Pontecorvo: "Taliban divided. They no longer know the country they want to lead " by our correspondent Annalisa Cuzzocrea Interview with the NATO representative in Afghanistan [at Forum Ambrosetti - The European House in Cernobbio] 03 SEPTEMBER 2021 3 MINUTES READING CERNOBBIO - Ambassador Stefano Pontecorvo has many doubts that the new Afghan government can be the expression of a coalition. "The Taliban are struggling with the recomposition of some internal discontent among various groups: the southern Pashtuns, the eastern Pashtuns and the Tajiks," explains the high NATO representative for Afghanistan, guest of the Ambrosetti Forum in Cernobbio. "And they have to do with a country they no longer know." Do you think the new president will be Baradar? "I have no doubt that Mullah Baradar will have a post of visibility. I am not sure he will be the prominent figure, because he has already been downsized during the Doha negotiations. And I don't think a coalition government can be born because such a choice risks breaking up the movement, which Haibatullah Akhundzada must keep compact. The skeptics to include non-Taliban personalities are the strongest, the military leaders, the strategists, and he cannot afford such an internal branch. It will probably be a multi-ethnic government, but with their own people. Maybe with a couple of Shiites from outside ». Is there a real difficulty for the Taliban to manage the country? "They weren't prepared, they had a much longer time horizon. They did not organize themselves to manage power and the state machinery collapsed. They have to rebuild it ». Travel to Kabul, by car with the Taliban by our correspondent Pietro Del Re 03 September 2021 Do they also have the problem of missing foreign aid? "They go for successive subsistences. Sustenance for the Taliban is now humanitarian aid, they know it is coming. Then there is China, the country's wealth, the countries of the region, Iran, the Saudis ". What is the balance of power between the Taliban and Isis-K? "There were bloody and cruel fights in Zabul two years ago. There are very strong doctrinal divergences ». On what? "Both the emir and the caliph have the title of guide of the faithful. And then the emirate is a nationalistic movement, while the caliphate starts from a territory and then tries to expand. Isis-K would like a part of the Aghano territory - Nangarhar and Kunar - to form the caliphate and then expand into Afghanistan and Pakistan ». But the Taliban are much stronger. "There is no doubt. But with Isis-K terrorism it can hurt because the Taliban do not have control of the territory, they are few ». Do the women's demonstrations in Herat, in Kabul, show that Afghan civil society has changed in these twenty years? "Yes, of course. We have created the conditions of security within which civil society has developed. We have not imposed democracy or our values. Now they feel abandoned, betrayed because we made them feel freedom and we are no longer able to guarantee it. But certainly the Taliban find themselves dealing with a country they do not know and with a society they do not expect ". Is the resistance of the Panshir, under the bombing, doomed to succumb? "The panshiris are surrounded, but historically that region is difficult to conquer. The Taliban have already had many losses ». Are Pakistan Turkey and Qatar crucial at this stage? "I always say that the Taliban are not great cosmopolitans, the West has little influence. It is therefore up to the neighboring countries to accompany them in the right direction, also because they are the ones who have direct interests in stopping fundamentalism, so that there is regional stability and so that infrastructure projects can go ahead ". Di Maio said talking about a reopening of the embassy in Afghanistan is premature. "I fully agree on a question of security and then, as the minister said, community coordination is needed to be stronger". What do you think of the dialogue with the Taliban? "I believe that it must be implemented bearing in mind that we have very few instruments of pressure other than the recognition of the regime, a legitimacy they care about. We will calibrate according to behaviors and not words, but we must dialogue. Also to take other people out of the country ». Do you think that the countries of the Western alliance have done their utmost, for these people, in the withdrawal operations? «Look with the time we have had and in the given conditions we have all done our best. I think I can say that among the 124 thousand people we have taken away there are most of those most at risk ". Is there a scene that has stuck with you? "Multiple. The departing families, the post-attack when the wounded were passing by, the great work that the Norwegian doctors at the hospital did when the elderly, dehydrated children arrived ". Do we need a European defense force? "When a single actor has 90% of the assets and influence he makes 90% of the decisions." If we want to count more than the United States, do we need to go in that direction? "If we want to count more, General Graziano is right, speaking of the need for a rapid European action force." Subjects afghanistan Read also Afghanistan, US rocket stops a new attack. The Taliban: "Departures possible even after 31 August" Afghanistan, that clash over the withdrawal that split NATO: Italy and the GB against the USA Biden's defense of Afghanistan: "I decided but the allies were warned". And in the evening he calls Draghi © All rights reserved[Repubblica:www.repubblica.it]

This is interesting and usefull: to have informations click on urls on the second colomn, in the first one you have files and script for computers. About the url on YouTube is not available. Perhaps you have to say your nickname/account there so to find or to make it pubblic and not private.(Lovera)

However, there is also another ending classified among the reciprocal squeeze (term of B. Romanet) where each winner accompanying a unilateral one squeezes the other opponent in the other two suits and which is better suited to the fact that it is not necessary to establish the right orientation unilateral having an idle card to be discarded on the squeeze card. Usually the control of the unilateral is maintained so the winner is given by the double threat.Therefore, after ♠ J and K discarding a ♣ we run all the ♣ discarding a ♦, a ♥ and a ♠ then ♦ A and K bring us in front of the double threat and on ♠ A the small ♥ is discarded as an idle card and if everything happens as said before we will have as a winner together with A and K the 7 in ♥ (otherwise the last winner will be one of the unilateral threats).

This should mean that on ♠JKA (pitching ♥ and ♣) the Queen does not fall otherwise I can orient ♠ towards the opposite side (if it falls in W on the third round the threat is then in a favorable position and therefore the squeeze is RFL otherwise no) I play all remaing ♣ discarding a ♠, a ♦ and ♥ (idle card) without cutting communications with the double threat, the♦ A and K and if no Queen falls it means that they will have both discarded Hearts and with the 7 I will have the 13th trick.

Playing 7NT ought to work a double squeeze with two possibilities in double menace not knowing the correct orientation of the unilaterals (if an RFL or not).

It has to remember that is not good to bid a grand with 50% of probabilities.(Lovera)

In W was Priday who played against a grand slam bidded by the young Italians who replaced the rested Blue Team on that occasion and who had preferred to make a more prudent and neutral opening lead in trump. The bidding was very dynamic: W 3 ♣ N X E p S 4 ♠, p 5 ♣ p 7 ♠ and Priday had: ♠ J ♥ K9 ♦ 843 ♣ AJ108653 At that time Cremoncini made the contract with a squeeze.(Bridge A' La Une pagg. 235-237)The final situation was that Priday was squeezed in ♥ and ♣ on the last trump: North ♥ A7 ♣ K West ♥ K9 ♣ A South ♠ 9 ♥ Q8

Looking to the future in peacetime when there is an acceptable stabilization of the general situation and, possibly, as long as possible to allow to apply directives and objectives that have been given and studied is one thing but these events that now change very quickly tell us, to now, to decant everything as quickly as possible to give way to another complex and more invisible dynamic that re-establishes the terms at stake and avoids further negative impacts.

But it's usefull to read this one to understand better at that point we are:https://www.commenta...e-taliban-lost/

What I have indicated must be seen in the sense of daily living (wellfare), logistics, networks, infrastructures at the service of the population for various situations, all aimed in their favor and also realized with foresight looking at the territory and favoring support for the development of their autonomy. Of course, about 20 years is a long period that is now also being questioned for what has been done, for what has not been able to be completed and for what has not been well foreseen. It is not the time to procrastinate but to be decisive in the defense of what has been carried out so far. Because if it all started with all the best intentions and emphasis this does not mean that, with the passage of time and in the field of reality, no obstacles to achieving the objectives have been glimpsed. A predictable and difficult thing to manage is "exporting" the Occidental model without considering having to preserve their Afghan identity. Perhaps at a certain point it was proceeded "automatically" without having great results and, therefore, starting to waste energy over time and, perhaps, it had to know how to stop and reconsider. However, the resistance to the return of the Taliban regime could be the sign that not all has been lost.

Also "Afghan Lives Matter"

I asked to integrate the speech considering what I have detailed and that can be further implemented as well as to find the post that explains what the Winning Trick Count is (from which the "winning" pdf is taken and which was inserted in a thread with dialogue relative) thing that should be easier on BBO's part. As mentioned, I use GIB in P.A. as a research gadget usefully used for the verification of situations for which feedback is needed (also for a comparison of results / indications generally speaking).

I still present 2 screenshots of hands taken from the List of Interesting Tables: in the first the fourth card in Diamonds being a winner allows you to discard the loser of Hearts or to make 13 tricks for all the pairs that have not had the opening lead in that suit while in the second according to the biddings at level 3 they seem to indicate the top honors and the repeated sequence in Diamonds allows to discard the losers of Spades so as to have the possibility to ruff for 12 tricks. Once again I urge you to participate by interpreting this "silence" as a surprise for a new speech and which, as you can see, also works in other situations (Don't leave me this way): hand n. 1) https://drive.google...ew?usp=drivesdk hand n. 2)https://drive.google...ew?usp=drivesdk

The winning pdf explaining WTC (= Winning Trick Count) was found on a BBO sub-Forum but I don't remember which one (probably it had as subject the Law of Total Tricks or the Losing Trick Count) while I remember that the page before opening the pdf had a small index on the left and, looking down with other items in the column so if someone had identified the topic he could indicate it since this "count" had been developed for the bidding in defense as well as for completeness of speech. When I said "Initially (to improve)" I was not referring to the playing skill but to the verification of this method and its results with GIB. In this regard and in this phase it is not necessary to convert a small slam into 6NT which certainly gains more IMPs but it is better to leave the plan to suit to preserve the cutting power that can allow an extra trick. Still always in this first phase you don't have to worry about bidding a grand slam but just play for the small by registering that you have made an extra trick (there will be time later to apply) and, if playing a small slam you go down it doesn't matter if the slam has been made and bidded by other players or if the analysis tells that you can realize it. What matters only is that at least a small slam is bidded. Having up to now quite sufficiently provided indications on its use, I invite you to participate in the speech on this new evaluation method for slam research, thanks.

For hands with a void, the void is considered a "virtual Ace" to be inserted into the count. Sometimes the opener has only three top honors but in this case a length in some color provides an additional winner that brings the count back to four. I now present an interesting hand where the opener (with 4 winners) receives a splinter in response which shows an hand with same force and strength most likely 6-4.With the RKB we get to know K in ♠, A and K in ♥. Now this WTC impacts with the RKB in the sense that it is known that there is still a Q to be placed (untold in RKB and here in ♦ making a small sequence). But, sometimes, there can be two possibilities that make the difference between a small and a grand slam depending on its position (as you can see in the hand we would have a suit at least 7.th which brings the count to 18 usefull for bidding a grand slam that is here). I would have found a way to resolve or limit the ambiguity of that position through another convention. This is the hand:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JdZYM0-JY7Zv5-krE8Nbj6xzTsRofqK8/view?usp=drivesdk

However, here are the references that alert you to the possibility of a slam bidding: you must have a total of 17 (which corresponds to the 5.th level) or 16 but also having a second fit (which leads to having an additional trick, therefore arriving at 17) to bid the small slam. (This number could still be a little decreased but the slam that would be played would require additional conditions that would make it more "fragile"). For the grand slam 18 (or 17 with at least a 7-card suit on the line). Since there is the possibility of having two losers for the small slam, one of these must be necessary eliminable. Likewise for the grand slam there will be only one loser that must be eliminated but all suits must have a first round control. For this purpose the sequences such as Ace vs void, Ace / King stiff vs King / Ace x (doubleton), Kx vs AQx, up to a suit to be easily stabilized, where the long part of the sequence is opposite to the loser to be eliminated, are useful. It should be considered that if two suits are missing from the bidding where there are losers too this can mean that the points are concentrated in only two suits and, therefore, the slam should be avoided. Another point of attention if you have a sequence next to a loser to be eliminated which would therefore can be ineffective for the purpose.

Fortunately, the modern bidding is quite clear and descriptive, thus providing useful information on the length of the trump (since it is of interest for the "count") to both players. Regarding the number of the three top honors(A, K, Q), one part is displayed in the hand of a player and the other number can be deduced from the partner's bidding in this way: from the range in which that is placed, about pointings his/her bidding, you consider the minimum value (i.e. for the open bidding if the range is 12-14 / 15 the minimum value is 12) and divide it by three (this fact was independently verified by me then finding confirmation in the pdf) and you will have the number of top honors of the partner so that you can proceed to the final count (usually within the second round where the bidding is further defined for new additions or confirms the initial hypothesis). Initially (to improve) it is easy to check with GIB if, by repeatedly using 'redeal', you select an opening hand and at the same time you have a hand where you can use the Jacoby 2NT convention in response having something like this:https://drive.google...ew?usp=drivesdk After my cue-bid GIB goes directly in 6 ♠.

Therefore the "Winning Trick Count" (WTC) will be used which has been clearly and thoroughly explained at the beginning of the pdf: length of opener's trumps + length of responder's trumps to which add the number of Aces, Kings and Queens in the hand opener's and that ones of responder's hand. Deducting 6 from the sum gives the game level. Except that while in the pdf it is explained "with cards seen" now it must be done instead at the table during the bidding phase. And that this speech was, for some, already considered, this screenshot seems to tell: https://drive.google...ew?usp=drivesdk where the pair in N / S starting from level 3 (♦, ♥) then at level 4 (♣, ♦) Queens and Kings are reported continuing with 4NT to ask for the Aces. It could be said that it would have been better to do this also at the fifth level and, discovering that ♥ was not protected,to bid 5♠.

Some of the hands present in the "Gallery" are not recent but, as regards the slam contract, they are apted. The remaining majority part is not used to make statistics as they were deliberately "captured" in a short time (using the frequently repeated use of the "redeal") with predefined conditions (always the same) and, therefore, endorsing the hypothesis .I am saying that I want to present a "method" to increase the possibility of getting to bid slams without letting them slip away. This is something that was already present and used for another occasion but little known and that I have developed further (as usually you should always do when you become aware of something in order not to limit yourself unnecessarily). And now I provide the source:winning.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I_4g1o162S87F4viOk_Oltdhu730F4M_/view?usp=drivesdk A suggestion: it is not necessary that you see the whole pdf (it concerns the defense) since the author provides a few examples to verify its application in sacrifice bidding situations and develops the rest of the pdf on confirmation patterns and statistics, but stick to the concept of the initial part (if you like).

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Team

I can give you some additional information taken from The Bridge Immortal by Victor Mollo: "a couple of weeks before the World Championship in Buenos Aires in 1961, the engineer Guglielmo Siniscalco [who lived in Bari behind the Church of San Francesco] , Forquet's regular partner, suddenly had to give up his participation. At first Perroux [captain of the Blue Team] seemed inclined to fall back on a new couple but then, at Forquet's insistence he was replaced by Benito Garozzo who learned, in just 10 days, the subtle sequences of the Neapolitan Club and played it with him for the first time in Buenos Aires perfectly. " The whole Blue Team is still remembered now because their members have produced an extraordinary result by winning the various World Championships for several consecutive years for their undisputed professionalism also due to a deep affinity between all of them. Their record is unsurpassed and unrepeatable.

Now it should be said that playing with GIB (in Play Anonymuosly) allows me to have a pre-set tool available without looking for other sites that would also require computer-related knowledge that I do not have. Moreover, I am happy with GIB perhaps because we have the same basic system (which I call Stayman Advanced as BBO Advanced which, however, is more complicated while mine is more flexible, effective and also aggressive / competitive and which fits well into the trend having been updated with the conventions in use). Obviously the only way to keep track of what is being done are the screenshots of the hands played. So I had time to organize the "Gallery" divided into "Screens" (only hands from slams also not declared)(94 hands), 2 Clubs (used when I made the topic on the defense against 2 Clubs to verify its use)(25 hands), Soloway Jump Shifts ( only hands of this type with indications on the Karen Library about that convention)(23 hands), Non-slam hands (partial contracts or with slam hands that do not have the conditions to continue in the bid)(50 hands), One-suit for Slam (weak 2 openings / at level 3 or 4(=barrage hands) for an opening suit ending in slam by the partner)(8 hands), MichaelsCappellettiUNT (only hands of this tipe)(3 hands).

I am finally back on the Forum. After my last post that expressed satisfaction (and which was also contained compared to the truth) for a result that was unexpected and to be considered as it concerned a change of norm previously established, for a short time I stayed away. As time passed, I also noticed a certain resistance to return and this did not, however, agree with me. In the meantime, personal commitments and sad news events also took place (which were also reported abroad) which further distracted me and which I followed on the other social network. To try to resume I followed the "Wednesday Tournament" (Bridge Lesson) on YouTube where, however, it should be said that they could present it better. Then I found the Bridge Base Online site (where I took the opportunity to register) with Australian Joan Butts (Fourth Suit Forcing) tutor. I then resumed going to B ♠ B which I use instrumentally and in a more profitable way than just the game for verification / use of conventions, game situations or game objectives regarding the scores.(Lovera)

THANKS ! (I' m happy).

Hi, i've recently discovered Lexington Lab Band on YouTube: has a rich variety of songs covers on many artists (put a look for).