TimG

I agree: it provides a new appreciation of the BW selections. I also agree that it is fine if a few more routine hands slip into BBO forum contests, it's not really a bad thing if almost everyone passes the test on a few deals. If nothing else, it may reduce the tendency of participants to look for the trick in every deal. When bidding CTC hands, you can be pretty sure that when your auction is 1N-3N you've missed the top spot, for instance, so there may be a tendency to look for the unusual. I'm curious how the results would be affected if the contracts were ranked and then the participants matchpointed based upon contract reached.

I doesn't look to me like the 2D bid was made by a passed hand.

That's a frequency chart, not a score chart.

There is no designated spot for system in a person's profile, is there?

That means that about 3 pairs have bid since your last ranking update. This member of the current 10th place pair is anxious to know how many spots we dropped.

A psychic control as Adam describes, really isn't a psyche, or doesn't expose a psyche. The classic example is the old KS controlled psyche of 1M with exactly 4-6 HCP and a four-card suit f a certain quality. There were ways in which opener could reveal the weak type or that responder could force opener to continue even with the weak type. This wasn't really a psyche, but rather a two-way 1M opening by agreement. Maybe that is what Dan was getting at: if the partnership does it by agreement, then it's not a psyche.

The relevant portion:

I don't understand what you're asking. Is it your suggestion that psyching a strong response over a limited opening is free? Tim

That would be ridiculous if based upon the filing of a recorder memo -- a cheating allegation made through the proper channels is well within a player's rights even if it is entirely without merit. If you are concerned about the post here, I would still think you are far off the mark.

I don't think that's what Tyler said. I think that it would be strange to believe that bidding theory is currently as good as it will ever get. I'd guess there are improvements to be made and that some of the improvements would run afoul of current system regulations in some jurisdiction or another. I do think some things are disallowed because of randomness that comes with unfamiliarity. And, that randomness increases the likelihood that lesser players will win an event. If that's what you mean by "are better" perhaps we are actually in agreement.

Speaking as a member of the pair currently in 10th place: GREAT IDEA!

My partner sent me system notes (all of one page) one week before we bid. We have played off and on for many years and are both familiar with the methods we are using. (We may be the only ones familiar with the methods.)

Canape Churchill with strong NT. (Frequent canape by opener, no strong forcing opening, almost entirely natural.)

Does the ACBL define this in the alert charts? Or, convention charts? The Laws no longer define convention, correct?

During the forum bidding contest, I received a few message like: I don't know why I was receiving messages for a club. Tim

Thanks, all done.

My partner and I happen to be available, is anyone around to host? Thanks. No biggie, of course, if no one is around on such short notice.

I vote: may not.

1) No. 2) I believe I did this and an adjacent card was played (though at the time I figured it was operator error). After that, I did not click on cards that did not pop up (turn yellow) for fear that the card that was popped up would be played.

I think Sunday is the 25th.

Tonight while playing a Robot Rewards a couple times I had cards that were legal to play, but which did not pop up when mouse-overed, in fact, an adjacent card popped up. In the first case, on opening lead, I clicked on the ♣A and the (adjacent) ♦4 was played. I figured it was my mistake, but later in the hand, when I tried to play the ♣A, I could not. The two adjacent cards, one ♣K, could be played, so I played the ♣K. Later still in the hand, I experience a similar problem, but this time I believe I could play the ♣A, but not the ♣Q. I only noticed this problem during this one deal. I did a screen capture at some point, but not thinking, copied something else before pasting the picture into a new file. Tim

I believe I read that in the newest release there is an option for randomly switching north and south so that if a pair is practicing they don't have to change seats to switch from opener to responder or the like. I'm guessing that the feature actually rotates the deal so that in the case of your script the overcalling hand would always be over the opening bidder.

They might change their minds about putting in the memorization time if this becomes a monthly event?

Do you log out or just close the window? I think you need to log out before closing the window in order to save the setting changes.

Well, technically the UI still suggests something, it's just that the AI also suggests something and the AI can be acted upon.