jonottawa

Looks like the weigh-iners have weighed in. The actual hand doesn't actually prove anything since pard (me) didn't have his bid. I was just curious if anyone else would do what my pard did with this hand. I was the doubler and my double was gross. I didn't want to bid 2 Spades and get raised to 3. But I didn't want to sell out to 2 Hearts. I just hoped (and was willing to risk) pard didn't have 3-4-5-1 or something and bid 3♦. ♠QJT4 ♥Q ♦54 ♣AQ7542 Still, with the vast majority of you I would have landed on my feet. Unfortunately, my pard floated the double, a choice that noone else has made as of yet. I take full blame, since I was masterminding a bit and made the first mistake.

As an atheist with a personal interest in the subject, I didn't find this particularly interesting either. Did Jesus exist? Probably. Does that prove anything about the existence of a supernatural creator with a bad temper who craves adulation and carries grudges for eternity? No. These links (for example) are more interesting, imo. http://www.atheist-community.org/library/a...read.php?id=700 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_is_not_Great

We'll see ... It seems more likely to me that someone merely mistranslated the name of the USBF than that someone is sitting around inventing rulings that never happened. I defer to Helene on the reliability of the source. If it is true, hopefully we can find a few prominent and respected members of the US bridge community with enough class, common sense and cajones to start a petition against the ruling. Where do I sign? Does this mean that the Women's teams in Beijing next year will be USA II and USA III ? And what's up with China being the host every year, anyway? (Ya, I know, some mind sports olympics thing, but what's the advantage of lumping bridge in with that?)

Assuming this is true ... That's why I was so disheartened to see people like Fred going over to the 'dark side.' I figured that would give the wingnuts political cover to make a reprehensible decision like this. This will not stand.

I can assure you that partner wasn't 3236. :(

I agree with the 2♦ bidders. Ya, it's unfavorable, but it's also a red game. As long as the bidding isn't at the 5 level by the time it comes back to me, I'll be able to show this hand with a great deal of precision. Barring a horribly unlucky complete misfit, we'll get to a good spot. I don't mind pass. If my first concern was risk-aversion (avoiding looking silly) I'd pass. It's my 2nd choice. I prefer 4♥ to 3♥. You miss too many games with 3♥ and won't be able to get ♠ into the picture anyway, so while 2♥ makes some sense (you might get to bid 3♠ later,) I don't like 3♥ at all.

[hv=d=e&v=n&s=sa65ht854dk932ct9]133|100|Scoring: IMP P - P - 1♥ - 2♣ 2♥ - P - P - X P - ?[/hv]

Aight. My 'interesting' detector failed me on this one. Sorry to post a stinker. I was 'sure' that when I led a Heart it would give up a trick and the match would end in a tie. But as others have said, I wasn't willing to risk making a different lead and have a Heart be right all along. It's a much better problem if Diamonds are QJT instead of QJ9, though, because no lead is truly 'safe' on the actual hand. I led a Heart. It took away a 2-way guess. The match ended in a tie. They played it from the other side at the other table, hence the different lead and result. http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/fetch...ayed=1194576144

I think we've arrived. (Calling this hand freakish is an overbid.)

[hv=d=w&v=n&s=st3hq9875dqj9c532]133|100|Scoring: IMP 1♣ - P - 1♠ - p 1NT - P - 2♦NMF - P 2NT - P - 3NT - Float[/hv] Barometer scoring, so you know you only have a 1 IMP lead. Not clear if your counterpart at the other table knew the score. But I suspect not (every time we've finished a board, the score has been instantly available, so they're probably a fair bit ahead.) EDIT: On the penultimate board, your counterparts were in 2 Spades just making on a 6-2 fit with 17 high between them. It makes 3 Diamonds the other way. You duplicated their result. (In other words, you also had a 1 IMP lead with 2 boards to go.) Would your lead be the same if you didn't know the sotm? Do you ever lead the 9 from a holding like Q9876? If so, when?

I'm starting to see the light. If we don't come down hard on the Venice Cup team, the next thing you know this sort of behavior will happen and we'll devolve into a state of anarchy: Girls Punished for Hugging

Without delving into the whole other imbroglio of this thread, I just wanted to comment on this one bit. When there is a BIT, whether the TD should be called immediately depends on the NBO. My understanding is that in the ACBL, they want you to call the TD to establish that there has been a BIT. In other locations, you can simply agree to the facts with your opponents and carry on. So in England, I might say "Do you agree there was a BIT?" If the opponents nod, then I just carry on and call the TD later if I feel there was a problem. If the opponents disagree, then I would have to call the TD. Now, IMO, I believe the latter is a much better way to run things. I agree that if all are experienced players that getting an agreement on a BIT without a director call is preferable (here we're talking about what ACBL policy SHOULD be, rather than what it IS.) Against players you suspect might be novices, I still think it is LESS intimidating to politely call the director in the manner suggested by mycroft than to potentially confuse your opponents about whether or not they've done something wrong by asking them to confirm that there was a break in tempo. Most directors (club directors, at least) make a point of greeting new players, learning their names, and making them feel welcome. Calling the 'nice director' over and saying 'there was a break in tempo over 2♦' and letting the director take it from there is the best way to proceed, imo. (And yes, at a club game, you might just cut the beginners some slack. But you shouldn't be REQUIRED to do so (maybe it's a club championship and you want your name on the plaque, or you're having a really bad set and can't afford to risk giving up a board to the worst pair in the room, or you've cut this pair some slack before and they took advantage, etc.))

I agree completely with almost everything (except where you imply you're in any way responsible for the brief p***ing contest that broke out.) I think you've got your underestimating and overestimating backwards, though. I read the letter and thought '6-8 seconds? Uh, no. If that's not the most self-serving statement I've ever heard ...' I could be wrong. This guy could be Job reincarnated. But I doubt it.

I think it goes something like: An honest politician, a crooked politician, santa claus and the tooth fairy are all walking down the street and notice $1,000 lying there. They're all equally fast, notice it at the same time, and are equidistant from the $1,000. Who ended up with the cash? (Answer hidden below.)

I don't get folks who wait until the spoiler is revealed and then vote. Seems to be a common practice around here though. I think the poll choices could have been better. If you had a 'mostly bad luck but West gets some' choice, I think it would have received the most votes. If you have a hand where only 1 side could bid on and doesn't, where a significant % of the field bids on, and where bidding on works, I think it's normal to give them SOME blame. I think West's decision is close. To say it's not is a minority view, I would imagine. If I were West and bidding on was right, I'd say: "Sorry. I could have moved." expecting to hear: "NP. Close, but pass looks right. I didn't have to have this much." Just like if I passed and passing was right I would expect to hear: "Nice Pass!" "Thx. Pretty normal, I think."

Burned. :)

Aight. Interest in this one seems to have petered out. Maybe it wasn't a fair question. I doubt more than 1 pair in 10000 could INTELLIGENTLY distinguish between J / AQJT974 / A4 / Q83 and 4 / AQJT974 / AJ / Q83 I 'unilaterally bashed' on my 2nd call and bid 4NT. I wanted to bid 4NT while both my pard and I knew for sure what it meant (Keycard for Hearts) and not later when it could arguably mean Keycard for Spades, Keycard for Hearts, Blackwood ordinaire, or quantitative (like Codo was saying.) I considered pard to be a heavy favorite to have 3, in which case I was bidding 7NT, hoping that either one of our suits ran or that there were 13 toppers anyway (like beatrix45 was saying.) He didn't. I bid 6NT. He had the 1st hand. Doh. In hindsight, 3 Spades is probably better. But on the actual hand while you can delay the guess as long as you want, I think in the end you're still going to end up guessing. It scored ok on BBO (lose 0.7) but might not do so well IRL. When I looked at all the auctions that got to 7, though, none of them made any sense. So I thought it would be a good problem. http://online.bridgebase.com/myhands/hands...rname=jonottawa

How did I know it would be a simple and elegant solution that I never would have thought of in a million years? :)

Okay, my last kick at the cat:

Okay, this isn't as elegant as I would have liked, but I think it's a solution for specifically 10 dwarves. I took a completely different tack this time:

I'm still not sure if this is right, but I'm gonna post it now just in case it is.

Right, my answer is off. Sigh. More hidden below.

I'll try to redeem myself and take a stab at the 3-colors problem.

It wasnt so much an analysis as an explanation of why each dwarf couldnt just say what the one in front of him has on, as Helene appeared to be suggesting. See the hidden text in jtfanclubs post for the solution to saving 9/10. (And be prepared to be "outsmarted" when you do.) :( Actually, I'm not sure his solution works either. What if there is an uneven number of black hats vs. red hats? ie. 7 blacks vs. 3 reds originally. Does it still work? That is TOO cool. Great puzzle.

Wow. Neat. Outclevered indeed. That gets you up to 1 dwarf saving 2. I'm still too dense to see how that gets you all the way down the line (1 dwarf saving 9.) First guy says black (next 2 have same color) he has a red cap and dies. Second guy sees that guy in front of him is red. He knows it's the same color as his cap. He says red. He has a red cap and lives. Third guy knows that his cap is red because the first guy said he had on the same cap as the 2nd guy. He says red. He has a red cap and lives. I'm the 4th guy. What color's my cap? What do I say? With that last bit of foot-inserting into mouth, I am off to google the solution. Thanks for the puzzle.