TimG

Ben, I can understand East trying to play in clubs after the takeout double (though I would just pass) and then taking preference to spades over opener's 2H. But, why on earth would he redouble with that hand? Tim

It doesn't sound to me like partner can have AKQ or AKJ of clubs, RHO has to have something, he might have been fooling around with the transfer on the way to 2S, but not after he redoubled. You can put the Queen of clubs in the north hand (and leave east with Axxxxx) and 2S still rates to make. I think we agree that someone has done something wrong. Unfortunately, I expect it to be partner (who passed 2H). Tim

Well, let's see, how about: [hv=n=sxhkqjxdaqxxxckxx&w=saqjxxhaxxxxdjxcx&e=skxhxdxxxxcaqxxxx&s=st9876ht94dktct84]399|300|[/hv]

I can imagine +840 for the bad guys. (I have a hard time imagining a good score for our side.)

What is wrong with sort of old-fashioned and simple: double jumps (and jump reverses) are splinters, 4m is 4-6 with good suits and 4M is, well, game?

Isn't this one of those situations you'd prefer to avoid, especially if you are considered the stronger team? You don't want the opponents to bid a slam that requires you to guess which of two suits to lead to beat it. That's sort of a coin flip for 13 IMPs. Tim

I thnk 3S (fit) and 4D (splinter) are both wrong because of the lack of a 4th trump. I'm not much concerned with having to bid 5H over 5D, so I choose 2S. Second choice would be 3D.

I think these are arguements in favor of doubling less often -- only those times where you think it's critical -- rather than for never doubling. If I'm partnering Varsace and he asks me never to make a lead directing double, I'll be happy to oblige. But, I won't be insulted if he makes a few to help me,in fact I'd appreciate it.

Yes, I think Americans could get used to 00:00 to 23:59. We call it military time.

I was looking at that page when I found: 12 AM NY, 6 Paris. Yes, Paris is six hours ahead of NY, so that might have meant noon in NY and 6 PM in Paris. No Tim, 12 noon in New York would be 12:00 PM. That is how it's witten. I know this for a fact although I am not from or don't live in an English speaking country where AM's and PM's flourish. Furthermore, 06:00 in Paris can only be in the morning. 6 in the evening is 18.00 in European terminology. It makes perfect sense that 06:00 means 6 AM. I missed that. But, now I understand why you labeled 12:00 and not 06:00. Do they really do this in Europe, or is midnight 00:00 and noon 12:00? You are not right about 12 AM being midnight. Midnight (or noon) is neither AM nor PM. Tim

I was looking at that page when I found: 12 AM NY, 6 Paris. Yes, Paris is six hours ahead of NY, so that might have meant noon in NY and 6 PM in Paris.

12:00 AM in New York, 06:00 in Paris

I played a lot at OKbridge -- I was a member for 6 or 7 years and played 2000-3000 hands per year for a 2-3 year stretch. I never had a problem at my table that was the result of me thinking the opponents were cheating. And, to the best of my knowledge, my opponents never made any allegations that I was cheating. (That's not to say that I don't think my opponents were ever cheating. With all that bridge, there was likely some cheating at some point. I will also freely admit that I sometimes cheated -- I often had a set of system notes next to the computer and sometimes referred to them without informing the opponents that I was using a memory aid.) Yes, there were some people who were obsessed with the idea that their opponents might be cheating. But, I think the extent of the cheating was exaggerated by the vocal few who thought it was rampant. I also believe that the people who cheat when a rating system is in place will also cheat when there is no rating system in place.

Dear Tim! If a player with a low rating : finds a killing lead plays a finess for a Jack, wenn all kings are offside makes any very good action then he must be cheating. If players that have a low rating bid a close game or slam that makes don't bid a game or slam with a strong hand, that cannot be made defend succesfully by "guessing" the right contract then they must be cheating. If this is the way people think, it is a sad statement.

If players iwth a rating of, say 30 (with 25 lowest, 75 highest), drop the doubleton queen offside.. you say... "stupid novice, got lucky". If a player of 73 drops it, and you look and gold stars have ratings like 57 to 60, and you have never heard of the player with the 73 rating, you might think.. hmmmm... must be cheating. I've never heard of most of the gold star players and I have witnessed a lot of them playing very bad bridge. Does that lead me to believe they were cheating when they earned their star? No. When you see a self proclaimed novice execute a squeeze, what do you think? If you see a self proclaimed expert miss an endplay, what do you think? I really do not understand why ratings change things. I'm not claiming that ratings don't change things, just that I cannot for the life of me understand why.

What is it about a rating system that will make you more suspicious of this sort of thing?

I'm curious: what about the misrepresentation of skill level is it that you don't like?

It has always struck me as odd that people who play a game don't want to be rated. Next thing you know there will be a push for not keeping score at all -- no need to have any winners and losers.

It's unfortunate that the rest of the world insists upon having rules different from ACBL. Wouldn't it be easier if everyone just followed the ACBL's lead?

Rssponder would most likely hold a hand with 1. Primary Spade support (4+ cards) 2. At least slam invitational values 3. No first/second round controls in Clubs or Diamonds ♠ AQ632 ♥ AK5 ♦ Q73 ♣ 84 or ♠ KQ52 ♥ AQ4 ♦ Q52 ♣ QT8 look about right Richard, Perhaps I'll dig out my Blue team books tonight and do a little research, but as I recall, respond established a game force by bidding his suits in canape sequence. So, a sequence like 1S-2C; 2S-3H showed 5+ hearts and a game force with clubs being at least a fragment. The artificial raise type hands would first respond 2m and then jump to 4m. The order in which the minors were bid indicated what kinds of controls responder holds in the minors. Responder could also canape into opener's suit, and there was a sequence to uncover a super fit when responder started with a fragment, preparing to canape, and opener canaped into reposnder's real suit. Tim

Blue Team Club used canape by responder as well as opener. So, when the 2♥ response was made, it indicated 3+ hearts. The 3NT rebid should have clarified that the response showed 5+ hearts, if responder had only 3 hearts he would have bid his long suit next. Tim

There is an enormous difference between Precision and ROMEX and MOSCITO: Both Precision and Romex had very wealthy patrons. Precision was paid for by C.C. Wei. Romex was paid for by George Rosenkrantz Yes, Precision had a wealthy sponsor. But, Precision wasn't really anything new. Vanderbilt wrote about a strong club system in the 1920's. (I once looked through the book, it must be around here somewhere, I was struck that the scoring table listed the value of a trick at NT as 35. Once upon a time, not all scores ended with a zero.)

I don't know if there were hot keys, but you didn't have to use the menus. Typing: "/claim" was enough to claim; typing "/who" was enough to see who was at your table; typing "/stats user" was enough to see a user's profile (whether "user" was online or not). I understand that the ability to type commands into the message box is not a solution that would serve a lot of people well. But, I sure thought it was nice not to have to use the menus. BTW, these were all commands that were holdovers from the days when OKbridge was text based rather than graphics based. Tim

I have a mother; none of the problems you list surprise me in the least. Tim

I do believe you. I know we disagree on this aspect of the design. I just could not resist a light hearted reply -- I hoped the smiley conveyed that it was light hearted rather than a serious jab. Tim