TimG

Blue and red ribbon qualification track 1st and 2nd place finishes. (Effectively.) Of course, without reference to the size and strength of the field high finishes don't mean a whole lot.

If my daughter attended a Catholic school, that would be mingling with people who are different, more so than attending the public school that she does.

One level openings that may, by partnership agreement, be made with a King less than an average hand; weak openings at the two level which may be based upon 44 shape.

That site appears to give the wrong answer for this case; it says to first lead the Ten and then play low to the Jack.

Indeed. From time to time it would be nice to have a downvote option...

Which is it?

I don't think North has done anything wrong. But, how did South find the pass of 5♥? Isn't 5♥ a cue-bid in this sequence (if 4♦ is natural and forcing)?

I consider 3H, 3N, and 4H. I choose 4H, but think 3N is a close second. Over 4H, my first instinct was to bid 5D. Upon reflection, I bid 4S. I don't think partner bids this way with a 45 or 46 majors hand, with that he just passes 3N...unless he also has extras.

You should be able to do both, even if that means there are gaps in the numbering of the online Laws (as when Laws for such things as revokes are left out).

I would rebid 3D, denying a feature...since I don't have one. 2NT is a "feature ask", after all. I have had discussion to this effect: 2NT is a feature ask, a side Ace or King, not a side shortness. But, I've never had the discussion that a Queen does not qualify as a feature. Perhaps it is a failure of my discussions that has led to my different understanding. I do not mean to suggest that this is the best way to respond to a weak two-bid. This is just how I generally play when trying to keep it simple. And, assumptions about methods seems germane to this thread.

This thread is the first I've ever heard of Qxx being called a feature. I've always thought it was an Ace or King.

1) Single dummy, isn't the correct play in trumps to cash the King and then finesse? (Without real careful analysis, it seems like after two round of trumps, declarer should cash Queen of Hearts and Ace of Hearts in case the suit is 4-1 with the short heart in the same hand as the doubleton trump. But, let's just assume that all there is to the play is picking up trumps.) This seems like the normal play and I'd assign that result. 2) Second choice would be to assign 6D making to NS and 6D down one to EW with the reasoning that it was "at all probable" that declarer would play trumps incorrectly. In either case, the vociferous west should incur a procedural penalty. In the second case, I'd like to penalize the offender however many VPs makes the sheet balance -- that is if case two results in 4 "extra" VPs, I'd penalize the offender 4 VPs. I have no law reference, but these seem like the two reasonable options to me. Edit: I should have said "I'd like to penalize the offender enough VP to make the sheet balance". I realize there is probably some standard penalty amount, but suspect it is too small to act as much of a deterrent.

Won't it often be right to compete to the 3-level with a 4-4 fit? Especially when opener has a long side suit. There is also an advantage in getting to the three level before the opponents have had a chance to get into the auction -- 1M-3M is more effective in keeping the opponents out than 1m-1M-2M. I don't know about playing a level higher than the field, because the field will seldom let us play at the two-level in a known eight card fit. Sure it will happen sometimes, but I don't think it will happen a lot.

Last weekend, I played a KO match against a person with ~2000 ACBL masterpoints who stated that she never claims. During the match, she did indeed play out all of her cards even when they were all obvious winners. With the attitude expressed by some in this thread, I can understand her position.

You should be able to do this with an appraisal. Best would be both parties agreeing to an appraiser and telling the appraiser that the valuation is being done to determine fair market value for the purposes of division of assets between two parties.

Yes, property owners may appeal assessed values. How that happens likely varies from municipality to municipality. Where I live it is relative value that is important rather than absolute value. It can be advantageous for a town to assess property above (or below) market value because that keeps the tax rate lower (or higher). Some municipalities have rules about how much the mil rate can change from year to year and a re-evaluation based on accurate market values could necessitate a change that would exceed the rules. There may also be some state laws regarding mil rates and these may affect education funding (which is shared between the state and local entities). I do not mean to suggest I am well informed in this area.

Does that mean you'll be moving to Maine? Assessments in Maine are done by municipalities, not the county or state. It is common for assessed value to be higher than market value or sales price. Of course, if a whole town is assessed at market value plus 10%, it makes no difference to the taxpayers.

Ken, a current appraised value should reflect current market value, an appraisal done ten months ago may not reflect current market value. There should be a section in the appraisal that evaluates the current market conditions, that is whether prices are generally going up or going down and if it is significant in one direction or the other adjustments would be made in the appraisal process. The idea behind an appraisal is to determine current market value taking into consideration all factors; you shouldn't have to factor in market conditions to a recently completed appraisal. If the appraisal that you reference is ten months old, I would suggest paying the few hundred dollars a new appraisal would cost and using that value. I don't know the details, but it sure sounds like a current, independent valuation would be useful.

Which comma has been added in the right place?

Shouldn't the question really be something like: would you want to adopt this strategy if your opponents knew you were adopting this strategy? It seems to me that "balancing on most hands" would be exploitable, so even if it were profitable against unsuspecting opponents, it would not be profitable against informed opponents.

ASCII hand diagrams! That would be great. Also would be great if played hands could automatically be saved in ASCII...

I once came across a book, I think it was a copy of the Vanderbilt Club, that included a scoring table which put the value of a trick at NT at 35 points. That is: the zeroes weren't always superfluous.

I occasionally read and post from an iPod. I don't experience any crashes, but the hand diagrams can take a LONG time to load and often don't appear right when they do load (I often just give up, so I'm far from sure that they always load).

I had no idea that this feature existed. But, I just rated a played and their rating changed by 2 stars. So, it does seem to have an effect.

Some posts include a lot of white space as a result of lots of "interests". I've looked, but I haven't found a way to prevent "interests" from being displayed. Here is an example of what I mean.