Elianna

[hv=pc=n&s=saha6dk765ckq9742&d=n&v=b&b=13&a=1hp2cp2sp3cp3hp4dp4hp]133|200[/hv] Playing 2/1, what would you bid now (and would have you bid something different otherwise)? Assume 2S does not show extras, and 4th suit is still artificial in a GF auction. Otherwise you have not really had a detailed discussion and this involves two people from different countries, so don't assume American conventions. What I did: I bid 6H, because I wasn't sure that 4D set trump, and so didn't want to cue-bid or bid 4NT, and since I couldn't come up with an elegant way to diagnose the right contract at the table, I decided to take an aggressive guess.

I don't really have a strong opinion about this. Personally, I just want to know what to expect before I enter an event. I don't like entering a KO and not knowing it was Midchart or GCC until a director is called about a convention. And I don't like certain people in my district characterizing me as a b***h because I want the rules evenly enforced, and am ruining their fun. I might be a b***h, but not for that reason. But the main reason I posted is to say that people should not write a higher number of masterpoints on their KO card than they actually have. Teams have gotten in trouble and been kicked out of events for this, being treated in the same way as people who write lower numbers to get in lower brackets. (I realize that some directors encourage this, but as some directors are strict about it, you should be really careful about it.)

Humans are very good at pattern recognition. You can see it in bridge all the time. People look for patterns (that aren't necessarily there), and then use those patterns to make predictions that are not based on logic.

I'm so sorry for your loss.

Honestly, if there are tones that older people can hear too. If they used these tones, I would be fine with that, too, as a way to keep everyone away.

It says 10pm to 6am. I've been at school almost at 6am, but I don't think that most teachers will get there that early unless school starts at 7:20.

I guess that I would distinguish this as "active" vs. "passive". If the school used this noise as punishment to students, I would be very much against it as an "active" punishment. For example, if they had it on in a referral room and sent students there, then I would like to see the school shut down for that. But in the story at hand, they seem to be using it as a protective measure, in a more "passive" way. I guess I view it as an electrified fence around a farm. It (the sound) isn't being used as a "punishment" after a deed is done, but as a preventative measure to prevent bad deeds from being committed.

If I recall correctly, it was someone hooded, but we didn't see his face. But perhaps I missed it. Anyway, that would have been my guess on who took them.

Doreah That's an interesting theory. (This is a diversion from the book, so I don't know the answer, either, and don't think that I have spoilers. I was going to say my guess, but as it likely is based on trying to remerge with the book, it MIGHT be a spoiler, and so won't post.)

Lyanna And I echo what Mike said. Also other Targaryens.

More like Bywater combined with Bronn. And I liked Bywater, and was sad about his death.

Last episode the only unclothed upper body was Gendry's (male). But I think that as we as a society tend not to think of the top half of the male body in as sexual of terms as that of the female body those instances don't stand out to us as much.

I know complaints about changes from the book are really boring to you, but I bet that you would have one complaint. In the book, the traditional Qarthian gown (which Dany adopts) is a bit less demure, to put it mildly. :)

I guess I was trying to reassure you that this does not signal a change where the series will be like Harry Potter. My main problem with this episode was with the violence. Some was added in, but I think there's a big difference reading about it, and actually seeing it on screen. Adam just replayed the episode on DVR, and I deleted it after. I don't know if I am going to be able to watch that episode again. I don't know why the killing didn't bother me, but the torture in this episode did.

I wouldn't say it's ALL about the fantasy/supernatural stuff. As Hrothgar said, it's pretty minimal. What I really like about the book series is that magic is not the solution to everything. It's not all about finding the correct spell.

When it is a very big room, and the directors have small voices, and other people in between you and the directors are talking, it can be very hard to even know the directors are making an announcement, much less hear that announcement. I do think that the directors should have tried to quiet the room a bit before making an announcement. Or get a microphone. But I wasn't there.

Fantasy football is not physically playing football. Different leagues work differently, but the idea is to give participants the fantasy of OWNING/MANAGING a team, not playing on one. A lot of times (most of the times?) people have side bets/prizes involved with it. I would have imagined that these guys are very good at it, even without Jeremy's statement.

Funny thing: While my Dad lived there, he refused to pay the TV tax. At the time, brother was in the financial unit of Channel 1.

If West was told "you must make 2NT sufficient" and West is inexperienced, then I have some sympathy for West (but not due to the non-usage of a stop card). If West was told to make a sufficient call and if he bids anything other than 3NT his partner is barred and he's not allowed to double, and West chose to bid 3NT and it was wrong and is upset then I'm with LOLdonn and have negative sympathy.

Directly to OP's question: If a bid is alerted, and one doesn't ask about it, I don't really know why the laws should protect someone. The alert is your warning that you may want to ask. There are specific sequences that require a delayed alert/explanation, but this isn't one of them. I think that this is a case that shows one should never assume that an alert means what you expect it to mean. ACBL does not have (anymore? - my age makes me forgetful) "special alerts". If you want to know, you should ask. I don't have anything I can point to specifically, just years of observing rulings of: 1NT-(2♣)! ("I didn't ask because I thought it was Landy/Hamilton/Meckwell/Stand on your head and clap your hands...") Yes, that's different because there are many different meaning for 2♣, but I've seen it in other circumstances, too (this is the first thing that came to mind).

I guess it can be looked at from the other side, too. What if you kept getting dealt 28 HCP hands (between the two of you)? And you keep bidding and making very cold games. Why should your opponents keep getting -420 for "just following suit"? I'm not saying match points is necessarily BETTER than rubber bridge, I was just pointing out that all is not always what it seems. The point of matchpoints is that it compares what you do with your hands to what others do with the same exact hands. Perhaps you might prefer International Match Points (IMPs). This still compares what you do with your hands to others, but in the example you gave the difference would only be 1.0 IMPs, which will not feel like as much, and so may feel fairer (and more similar to rubber bridge) for you.

Firstly, when a result is reached at the table, the director should not replace it with "average", but rather try to determine what would have happened without the irregularity (and determine the probability of it happening, plus how favorable it is to the NOS - non-offending side). I do not understand why, if the director determined you were the NOS, you would get a worse score than the one you earned at the table. And anyway, was there really an irregularity? I mean, did the director determine if 2♦ was a misexplanation or a misbid? Because if it is the latter, the director should not be changing the scores at all. Secondly, I have a lot of sympathy with the first two doubles. But I don't think that W has his double of 4D, and if he knows what's going on, should try bidding 4S, over which I might try 5C by East. Still don't know if I get to slam (or if I want to be there - I'm guessing I don't if +200 was a good score for EW).

I agree with Justin, but would put it slightly differently. The point of this hand is that not all rules should be followed blindly. I've included hands like this in lessons (without pre-instruction because I prefer students get a chance to play with something before I tell them what I think) opposite a reasonable 12-count that makes game, in the same set with a regular 2H preempt hand opposite that same 12-count. The goal is that students will ask themselves why they didn't get to game, and that the advanced players will compare the same boards and realize that responder cannot look for game on his/her own! I also disagree somewhat with Hanoi's point about education. Yes, some students might like if they knew everything about bridge before playing in a tournament and never ever got 0's, but that's not how many people learn. Much of learning happens after your schema is shaken a bit, and then you can assimilate and adapt the new information, forming a more developed view.

To expand on the answer you were given, check out the ACBL Convention Charts. Note under competitive, 7b (Defense to): Since it appears that the bids above 2♣ all have a known suit, this is allowed.

Read the post above yours.