Brandal

There is no reason to assume you will bid unobstructed just because I'm no fan of highly unusual methods There is also no need for comments like "I would really love to play against you" You disagree with me,fine,leave it at that :)

Not sure if you reply to my post,but my point is as long as a method or system isn't allowed everywhere, it will favor someone somewhere,and that is not my idea of a fair-game-may-the-best-pair-win philosophy. I'm not saying "they" can't still enjoy the game, for me bidding is just a tool to try find our best contract, how we get there is less important than playing there, and declare/defend is what I find most interesting in bridge and I guess that is why I'm rather "indifferent" to many of the methods/gadgets/systems that are highly unusual.

I'd go as far as saying it also reduces the value of the competition. Almost like allowing one hockey team to wear all their protective gear and the other team no protection unless each player sits down and makes his own gear B)

I don't think the GiB is the problem B) I think the problem is staying focused, and "treating" them as real opponents

I don't know any other way to make bridge a fair game Hog? Either everyone skips or everyone runs is what I would be happy with. As long as there are different bridgefederations with extremely different rules as to what goes,I don't see this happening. I wish there was ONE set of rules worldwide that was used whether it was national or international events? I don't think the game is fair anymore when a pair comes to the BB and has changed or modified or added to their already highly unusual system....do you? So no Hog,I wouldn't be happy forcing anyone to skip,or one who likes skipping to run..... What I want is fair game,enjoyment for 4 people at the table not just 2. B) Let me throw a Q back at you,why is it so important to you to have unusual systems when "half the world" doesn't have a proper defense and doesn't know or have the resources or time or "interest" to cope with them? Fred points out even at the top level this is very demanding and cost a lot of time and money so I guess it's even harder for the average player? How much enjoyment will you be deprived if some of the most unusual methods were prohibited? As much as I appreciate your points and others too,and in a perfect world everyone would have time and energy to learn all the methods there are available,but this just isn't the case. :)

I enjoy a good psyche against me :) I just don't like psyching :D maybe HUM/BS are implicitly prohibited? :)

You say it so well Fred :) Yes,a game,and all games have a set of rules, and most games have the same set of rules worldwide and is understandable to those who take interest in the game. With bridge I feel that a minority wants "anarchy",anything goes and if you don't have a defense who cares? This makes bridge less about skill and more about fooling eachother in my opinion,that kid in the Simpsons yelling "haaa haaa" comes to mind :D I'm neither a top nor a bottom player,but I only play for fun these days,with a dash of competition thrown in,and it's neither fun nor competition to be railroaded by some clever pair who knows something I don't. I have always looked at bridge as communication,who knows, maybe that's why it's called bridge.....where I first and foremost listen to my side,while picking up som intelligence reports from the "enemy" and based on all information,take action. What a rant.....my bottomline is the more weird systems, it's not about fun for all 4 at the table anymore,only for 2. :)

I'm not trying to be a "smartass" here,I genuinly want someone's opinion as to why: Those who say prohibiting psyches is some other game similar to bridge,why is prohibiting another part of bridge,like HUM/ Brown Sticker etc still considered bridge and not some similar game? ty in advance Frode

Or score only against other tables with one or more GiBs playing would be ok. They're dull enough,and with no comparison even worse. :) -edit- no offence towards GiBs,but taking away the competitive part of bridge,like scoring and comparing,isn't a good idea for making the GiB "attractive".....but that's only one man's opinion ofcourse

Am I the only one who thinks it's the same board bid differently on 2 tables? After failure to alert 1C on both tables,does what NS bids matter?

Same board,two different bidding sequences taking place at different tables? To me the interesting question is,in this case,shouldn't both tables get the same ruling? Or does what the NS pairs do come into consideration?

I voted for Fred's opinion,because I hope he will keep number of stars to a "minimum",I fear inflation if some committee or the likes have a say in it.

Has happened to me twice,and message went to a real user. No biggie really.....unless they flee we might get a new friend :P

If the player really was a substitute,noone can blame him/her for "no agreement"....and certainly not go to this extreme? Bad bids,wrong bids,overbids,underbids,misunderstandings, assuming pd understands.....is still not a crime in bridge?

While I agree a simple thx or typ should be enough, in the online world especially with partners "you" don't play with regularly,the silence tends to feel awkward if nothing is said after the board is played. So I usually say wdp when nothing particular happens and I'm very careful when opps screw up not to offend them. Saying wdp after every board is silly,I know,but I think it's a substitute for not being able to sit at the table F2F and being able to discuss face to face between rounds. It's pretty much the same with everyone saying Hi all or hi opps when new opps arrive,it seems such a small effort to get the game off in a nice way,yet not everyone does that.

I tried unchecking the Notification box,and it works fine for me....

I have noticed this in the Lobby,when I move the pointer over names sometimes the profile and the yellow "where they are" doesn't come up for quite some time. I have to hold the pointer over one name maybe 5 seconds before response,then everything is fine for awhile then happens again. Frode "edit" I should perhaps add this usually happens when "surfing" names.....not staying "long enough" on one name in the Lobby.

They should, absolutely! Do you know what the problem is? Most players don't know if they get a bad ruling or not, so they just comply with anything the TD may say and do. Too many TDs get away with this. They may even think that they have made a correct ruling (according to the Laws of Duplicate Bridge). If that is the case, how can those individuals become better TDs? Ignorance is no crime, but it's silly not to at least try to improve. The TDs in question know perfectly well if they are familiar with the laws or not. Another reason why you don't get more complaints is the simplest of them all: Most players can't be bothered even if the ruling is somewhat dubious (to be diplomatic). They just get on with things. Others don't compromise. Roland I agree with everything you say Roland,but.... Online it is not so easy to educate,improve,unless a big effort is made. What I suggest as a first step is to remove TD privelege for those who make horrendous decisions,like playing TD adjusting scores for himself,booting players he doesn't like and so on. I think we all can live with the occasional dubious ruling,but I also agree it's silly to not try improving TD skills. Knowing the Law isn't the same as knowing how to apply the Law,enforce the Law.

I think what Ben said "to use 1N-2D-2H to DENY four hearts" is a perfect example of a special agreement that should be alerted and explained. Reason is there is something more to the bid that you can't expect the opps to inquire about or know about. I think it's when a pair deviates? from the standard use and understanding of a convention or bid,it really needs to alert the opps without assuming the opps will ask.

I'm sure most bridgeplayers and TDs know that it's not the TDs business to explain bids/agreements. Next thing you'd know is the opps explain your bids B) Joke aside,I think issues like these could be solved without booting a player and without hammering a lawbook on anyone's head.

Maybe a "Reserve seat when player leaves" option when creating a table is a possibility. Host could then remove the reservation,or type in a new playername without having to click away all the players wanting to sit? Would be useful when a pair is playing in MBC waiting for a tourney to sign up for.

Would be interesting to know how many bad rulings are reported to abuse per 20 000 boards played in tourneys. A conservative guess: There are 2 new tourneys started every hour, averaging 40 tables and playing 10 boards. So 800 accumulated every hour,making it 19200 boards in 24 hours. Shouldn't abuse and this forum be flooded beyond belief if the bad rulings are as bad a problem as it seems to some here? For the record I think the number is higher than 20 000 boards played per 24 hours if counting pay tourneys. Would be interesting to know.....

I fail to see how 3H is insane and dbl ok on this hand. Partner likely to bid 3S on a 4 card does not appeal to me when I can show him a 5 card on the 3 level instead of the 4 level. 3♥ would work better than dbl if partner has four spades and three hearts. But he could also have one or zero hearts. Or two hearts and five spades. Or 3226. I haven't done any simulations but I would be surprised if 3♥ turned out to be more succesful in the long run than dbl. I agree with other posters that pass is better than dbl, though. I also agree with pass,not a good hand for entering the 3 level vuln.

I fail to see how 3H is insane and dbl ok on this hand. Partner likely to bid 3S on a 4 card does not appeal to me when I can show him a 5 card on the 3 level instead of the 4 level.

I mentioned somewhere I also think it's a matter of style,but since I would open 1D with 4-4 minor on this strength,I guess I "have" to open 1C with 4-5 to make a difference?