Elianna

Another important thing to discuss with your partner is whether you bid up the line, or not, and raising on three-card suits. I forget if this is addressed in the SAYC handbook or not.

I like 4NT.

There will be a higher ratio of doublers:passers the higher up the skill ladder you go. But agree with the sentiment that you cannot tell if someone is good or bad based on what they do on this hand. Funny thing is, after a certain point, I would be willing to bet money that the FURTHER DOWN the skill ladder you go, you would find a higher ratio of doublers:passers. I'm talking about those that just finished a beginner's course, or haven't even taken one. But I won't argue your point, because I could see it being true, too. I would believe that there's a U-shaped curve for the ratio of doublers:passers

I love movies from the thirties also. I watch the Thin Man movies all the time. Just watched The Great Ziegfield last night. Best Picture 1936. I just got to see the original on a plane (it was one of those with a personal tv where you get to pick what's showing on it). I very much enjoyed it.

Happy Birthday!

The requirement for 10 points for bidding at the two level is only when you're FORCED to bid at the two level (like partner opens 1♠ but you have diamonds). Otherwise, since you still CAN bid at the 1-level, a JUMP to the two-level should show more points.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_controversies_in_gymnastics The thing I find funny in that article is that they refer to these as "senior games". So bridge isn't the only game where "senior" doesn't mean you're ready to retire. Figure skating also has the main competitors categorized as senior.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_controversies_in_gymnastics

Really?! Yes, really. It happened in the 2nd day of the mixed BAM. A cell phone went off in Val's (our teammate who got the penalty on the first qualifying session) section and so Val checked the recap sheet to find out who it happened to. She then found out that the team got only a quarter board penalty. She went and asked the director why, and she was told that it was put in as a full board penalty, and "someone" changed it to a quarter board. She was not given a reason why, and it was strongly implied that it would not change.

our teammate forgot to turn her cell off and it rang and we lost a full board in the mixed bam. So I can verify that they are awarding penalties for ringing cell phones.

I actually was playing better at the end than at the beginning. It's wierd, but I tend to play better later in a tournament than at the beginning. I think that it's because I don't play enough, and playing in the beginning of a tournament gets me in practice for later. I was mainly playing a lot in LA in preparation for nationals. :)

Thanks all! All it took was playing in 13 sessions and placing in everything. B) And I felt ready for a rest after.

Slap the ***** out of a Frenchman. I am very suprised at you Winston...... why do you assume the English are racist and why do you assume we hate the French? Well, the French pretty much ruined the monarchy concept with Bastille Day and that revolution they allowed to occur. I figure the British empire would still be intact except for the French buggering it up for all the other kings and queens. :) The US revolution and constitution predates Bastille Day. The English can still be mad at the French. They gave the revolutionaries money and advice.

Out of curiosity... In what language?

Is that supposed to be bad for you? raw eggs are supposedly bad. Most bread does not contain eggs. Cookie dough on the other hand... I've only ever made challa.

Is that supposed to be bad for you? raw eggs are supposedly bad.

Sure, freedom of speech is a right, but this is not a freedom of speech issue. These forums are owned/run by a private entity and they have set out rules for the use of the forums, as was quoted above. And btw, I bet that you have worked at jobs where your "freedom of speech" was limited. I know that if I said any kind of swear word at my job, I'd be fired. They can't limit what I say in private, but I definitely can't use certain language at my job site. Anyway, freedom of speech says that the government can't put you in jail for what you say, not that private corporations/people can't treat you differently for what you say. Totally different things.

given how actively and diligently that is applied at the club level, I don't expect that much to happen on here. You mean you HOPE it doesn't happen here. That does seem to be the point of your posts. That people can be as rude as they want, and use as foul of language as they want, and if someone takes offense that's his fault.

In movie ratings, some profanities are considered more serious than others. For example, use of the words "damn", "hell", etc are not enough to make a movie be rated PG-13, but they are still considered profanities. Take for example, this movie, "The Visitor". It is rated PG-13 "for brief strong language" according to IMDB. According to a website that lists anything that one might find objectionable (don't read the whole threadif you're worried about spoilers) it contains And there's not much nudity/violence (not enough to raise the rating to PG-13). So to claim that saying f*** is ok in a setting that is supposed to be PG is not true.

This thread has made me think even more. Wow. I wonder how many people see abbreviations, and read the abbreviation, and not what it stands for. For myself, some abbreviations get automatically translated into their long version, but some don't. AIDS, DNA, UN, etc. don't get translated, but LOL (both ones), wtf, etc, etc... do. I guess expressions get translated but abbreviations don't? (By "translated" I mean that when I read them on a page, I read it as "laughing out loud" versus "dee en ay".

I agree with Jillybean in that I think that this language should not be acceptable public language, but I don't know that anything can be done about it. It's the way people talk nowadays. I can't even get my students (at a religious girl's school) not to swear in the hallways, I doubt that you could force adults not to swear, especially when they're not typing out the word, they're using abreviations. Since I saw this post, I was thinking about this subject. I was brought up that it is unacceptable to use certain words/expressions in public, and that those who do are breaking the rules intentionally, for attention. I now think that society does not impose this onus against words/expressions, and so there isn't a shock factor to many people when they read/hear them. I doubt that we can ever go back to the previous state, and wonder what a future generation will do when they can't shock their parents by their language.

I meant 23

In my experience the club qualifying games are not big earners for the clubs. Typical is to increase the entry fee by the same as the increase in sanction fee. Attendance is not greater, in fact, some people choose to skip these special games. I'm sure they are big earners in some areas, just not around here. Folks from around here simply have no desire to travel to the District event. So, there is little reason to hold the club games. If people were asking for the games, the club owners would offer more of them. I think they are "getting it" just about right. In Los Angeles (D23) some clubs have gotten around this by: 1) A separate game (in addition to the normal club game) for NAP qualifying. 2) If there aren't enough people who want to Q for NAP pay the extra card fee and then play in the main game. But not everyone pays the extra fee. I don't really like this, as it seems to be skirting the main idea of NAPs, which is to get people from clubs involved in tournaments. This way seems to imply that the clubs think that the point of NAPs is to get people to go play in clubs. When I lived in Lincoln, the whole club game was NAP or it wasn't, and it wasn't up to the individual player. And no one complained (except that there weren't more games). But in LA, I've heard players complaining about STaC games!

I still want to know how St. Paul moved to Michigan.

My letter: Dear Mr. Baum, I wanted to write to tell you how worried I am about the upcoming cell phone ban. I go to bridge nationals because I enjoy playing in a high level competition, and to see my bridge playing friends. But now with this upcoming ban, my choices seem to be: 1) Don't play in any national event 2) Not to be able to make plans in between sessions 3) Pay money for someone who MIGHT even keep my phone secure, just for the privilege of waiting in line to get it back after each session. I also am concerned about how this ban will be employed. Are we to submit our persons for searches in order to play in NABC+ events? I feel that this new rule is being implemented because there is a "suggestion" that people can use cell phones to cheat. However, there are many easier ways to cheat, especially in events that do not employ screens. It seems extremely ineffectual to ban cell phones in events that do not have screens (such as first rounds of the spingold, or the LM pairs), almost like having a high-tech alarm system on the back door, when the front door is missing. Sincerely, Elianna Ruppin The response I received: Dear Elianna: Thank you for your note.The ban on cell phones will take some adjustment by those that choose to play in North American Championships.The decision to do this was done for the protection of the game and the enjoyment of the players. As with chess , golf and other sports and games organizations ,we feel this is a necessary step to insure the comfortable environment for our members and to maintain a level playing field. We do not anticipate the need to search players.Screens will not deter use of communication devices by players or kibitzers that leave the playing area for any reason. Our intent is to take away an annoyance to many and eliminate one of the options to gain unfair advantage. I do appreciate you taking the time to offer your feedback on this issue. Kindest regards, Jay Baum, CEO ACBL